The Runaway Youth Act of 1974 was the product of several factors, including increases in the number of runaways in the 1960s, growing public understanding of their comparative normality, and heightened fears for their safety. The mainstream press influenced both public attitudes and legislative action during this time; the underground press depicted runaways as normal, if rebellious, teenagers. The 1974 act mirrored the existing runaway-house model, encouraging diversion of runaways from the juvenile justice system. Runaway houses, once underground services, were gathered under the protective umbrella of federally funded "alternative services." Normalization of service response and legitimization of an underground service are themes of this process. Paradoxically, the legislated solution to the problem of runaways was achieved by adopting a narrow problem-oriented focus, limiting the flexibility of runaway houses.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Anne B. Moses (1978) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: