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. .
Second of all, she says that when a child is brought to a courtroom, it usually began with a recitation of the adolescent girls' disobedience of the family rules. Then, the parents insisted on their rights to enforce discipline and invoke the law, which relates to a part of her thesis. After, a judgment was passed on both the child and the parents. To prove that "parents were not, however, powerless in their interactions with this court-, she says that Dorothy Chunn has argued that it was the parents that "volunteered- their children to court for discipline and in turn the court demanded that parents play a role in correcting their children with a probation officer as supervisors. T.Myers also says that a policing role was given to parents where they would stand as key witnesses and give recommendations as the punishment. In Montreal parental complaints represented almost half of the female cases She also explains that with the new legislation that gave to guardians more rights to put their children in institutions, the number of cases brought to court increased and it was up to parents to make the first judgment about what his a deviant behavior. In 1918, over 87% of the cases brought, were from parental complaints. .
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.
