In her article, Tamara Myers explained that young delinquent that were introduced to probation officers who investigated their work histories social and sexual behaviors and the family relations have led historians to the notion that the juvenile court was a tool from the Bourgeoisie to control the social moral and sexual lives of the working class. She argues that the working class parents were actually at the core of the new juvenile systems and they had an influence over the definition of delinquent conduct. Also, parents brought to court their children and insisted in their rights to have the state discipline them. To prove her thesis, she analyzes the juvenile systems through an examination of the roles of parents, young delinquents’ girls, and court officials in 1918, Montreal.

First of all, the author explains that the court depended on the reporting of young delinquents girls by parents and that it revealed a contradiction of opinion between the parents who favored incarceration ( reformatory schools) and Judges who preferred probation ( replace punishment by treatment). Therefo

Then, there is another sub-thesis emerging in her article. She says that her study joins the growing literature on social welfare reforms as a way of controlling the working class, but that the “clients” and their families played an active role. She also says that the state wasn’t as predominant and diffuses as earlier historians argued. Instead, parents joined the state in regulating their daughters. But then she goes to explain that it is the judges who maintained the ultimate authority in sentencing. Sentences were based on the input of court officials, who were mostly women because they wanted to extend the maternal rule in court, which investigated the lives of the adolescent girls. She also explains that social reformers in the 1910’s saw that sexual moral among single young working-class girls were looser, therefore they wanted to control “bad girls” and parents also agreed that the young girls and their social and sexual behavior needed to be controlled.

Thirdly, the author explains in what kind of cases it was drawn into. Most cases were from single mothers who worked that brought their adolescent girls to court because they stopped contributing financially. Contemporary observers blamed them because by taking up a job, they are abandoning their children to “bad” influences. She also argues that parents also used the court to control or punish the other parent when they are separated. Another reason for the usage of court by parents was to exercise the father’s right to his children, like the case of Guiseppe Rossi that was said to be unfit, but still “won his case”.

Finally, she explains that daughters who worked full-time expected freedom in their leisure time and some control over their wages to buy necessities and luxuries goods. But parents regarded that behavior as a deviance. Therefore, even thou

Some topics in this essay:
Guiseppe Rossi, Tamara Myers, Dorothy Chunn, Daughters Montreal, , juvenile systems, prove thesis, played active role, court officials, insisted rights, parents played, social moral, brought court, parental complaints, children institutions, tries prove,