The Docket Historical Archives

3-1-1970

The Docket, Issue 3, March 1970 The Docket, Issue 3, March 1970

Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/docket

Recommended Citation Recommended Citation "The Docket, Issue 3, March 1970" (1970). The Docket. 30. https://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/docket/30

This 1969-1970 is brought to you for free and open access by the Historical Archives at Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in The Docket by an authorized administrator of Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law Digital Repository.

THE DOCKET Villanova University School of Law Villanova, Pa. 19085

Villanova University School of Law VOL. 7, No. 3 V I L L A N O V A , P A . MARCH, 1970

Nader To Speak Here April 2

In an effort to reactivate the Law School Forum, the Student Bar Association (SBA) has in­vited Mr. Ralph Nader to speak at Villanova Law School on Thurs­day, April 2, 1970, at 8:00 P.M.

The SBA has expended a sub­stantial sum to bring Mr. Nader to the lav/ school in the hope that his presence will sufficiently "rouse student interest in the Foruo and will lead to a more interesting and expanded program in the coming years.

After graduating from Prince­ton (Phi Beta Kappa) and Har­vard Law School, Mr. Nader car­ried his academic credentials and his unrestrained energies into the field of consumer protection. Nader made his initial plea for safety de­vices in automobiles in the Har­vard Law School newspaper of which he was editor-in-chief. This article was expanded into the now nationally famous book. Unsafe at Any Speed. This publication won Nader not only fame, but also rallied considerable interest in his

Ralph Nader

Consumer protection has not been the only area of investigation for Nader and his "Raiders," the latter being a group of young law­yers who march under Nader's banner. They have become in­creasingly concerned with a num­ber of contemporary problems. One such area, which should be of con­cern to all of us at Villanova, is law school education.

Lisa A. Richette Jerome E. Bogutz

VIllANOVA lAW ASSOCIATES - A NOVEl CONCEPT IN CLINICAL LEGAL EDUCATION

Distinguished Panel Headlines Law R Symposium Dn Population Control

Whether and how the United States need impose restric­tions upon its people to prevent over-population of this country will be among the issues discussed at the Sixth Annual Law Review Symposium to be held Friday, April 3, 1970 in the Law School.

The participants in this Symposium on "National Popula­tion Programs and Policy: Social and Legal Implications" include Carl S. Shultz, M.D., The presentations of the panel-Director of Office of Population and ists and both the afternoon and Family Planning, Department of Health, Education and Welfare; Samuel Wishik, M.D., Director, Division for Program Development and Evaluation, Columbia Univer­sity International Institute for the Study of Human Reproduction; Cyril C. Means, Jr., Professor of Law, New York Law School; Dr. Edwin D. Driver, Professor of Soci­ology, University of Massachusetts, and Consultant on Social Sciences, The Ford Foundation; H. Y. Tien, Professor of Demography, Ohio State University. Acting as moder­ator will be Professor Donald A. Giannella of the Villanova Law School faculty.

As in the past, the Symposium will be divided into two sessions. In the afternoon session each mem­ber of the panel will present his position on the topic and a cross-discussion with the panelists and an invited audience will follow.

The evening session of the Sym­posium will be open to the general public and will find the panelists presenting a short precis of their afternoon presentation after which a lengthy question and answer period will follow.

evening cross-discussions will later be published in the Summer edition of the VILLANOVA LAW REVIEW.

Specifically, the Symposium will deal with the three issues pertinent to the formulation of any national program dealing with population and its control. The first centers upon the statement of any policy and the establishment of specific programs pursuant to that policy by federal government. Explored will be the position of the present administration that the United States pursue a policy of "family planning consistent with freedom of choice." Discussed will be wheth­er this position coupled with the efforts of the Department of Health, Education and Welfare is likely to succeed. If it is not likely to succeed, can the federal govern­ment constitutionally pursue a course more likely to induce or coerce affirmative action?

Secondly, the Symposium will evaluate the aims of the present programs of data dissemination and education to determine wheth­er they are properly directed to a

Continued, P. 8, Col. 5

A clinical course of study in juvenile court practice, to be of­fered next term and exclusively to students of Villanova Law School, augurs one of the most exciting op­portunities ever proposed to bridge the gap between legal education and actual practice. Lisa A. Rich­ette and Jerome E. Bogutz (class of '62), members of the Philadelphia Bar Association, have been ap­pointed Director and Assistant Di­rector of the new program, to be named The Villanova Law Associ­ates. It is a project with enormous potential for the future of clinical legal education, and one far ex­ceeding the scope of the common student volunteer project, normally limited to the indigent.

The new program will bring third-year law students directly in­to the courtroom under the recent Pennsylvania Supreme Court rule 12 3/4. Villanova is among the first law schools in the nation to initiate clinical education as part of its curriculum. The program will focus primarily on the area of representing indigent juveniles, but will also expose the law stu­dent to a variety of cases involving juveniles whose parents can well afford to pay.

"We don't contemplate a clinic which will treat what the street brings in," explains Mrs. Richette. "We're looking for something much greater, an atmosphere that will be a valid replica of real legal experience. The clinic will be a kind of partnership office, with two senior partners (Mrs. Richette and Mr. Bogutz) and as many student associates as are involved in the program. We will handle only cases which are both meritorious and which offer real values to our students."

The juvenile court clinic will have only a slight physical connec­tion with the law school. Its office (LO 3-8710) has already been estab­lished in the Philadelphia Bar As­sociation's new Theodore F. Jenk­ins' Memorial Law Library, located

in the Widener Building, almost adjacent to City Hall. It is fortu­nate housing for such a laudable endeavor. The office will open of­ficially in June of this year, spon­soring a summer internship pro­gram for 10 third-year students who will earn $100.00 a week. The formal instruction program will commence with a one semester course in the Fall, open to 25 stu­dents and offering two credits.

Funding for the three-year pro­gram will come from three grants: $60,000.00 awarded by the Council on Legal Education for Profession­al Responsibility (CLEPR); $7,-500.00 from the Philadelphia Foun­dation, and $5,000.00 from the Ur­ban Coalition of Philadelphia. Vil­lanova was one of a host of law schools bidding for the CLEPR award, and won out, according to Mrs. Richette, by submitting an imaginative program in which the University will become increasing­ly responsible for the financial cost of the program as it matures.

Both Mrs. Richette and Mr. Bogutz have been involved in juve­nile and urban law problems. A former assistant district attorney and chief of the Family Court Divi­sion, Mrs. Richette is the author of The Throwaway Children, which pleads for deeper involvement of lawyers and citizens in the juvenile justice system. Mr. Bogutz was deputy director of Community Legal Services, Inc. from 1967 to 1969. Formation of Villanova Legal Associates will provide both attorneys clinical status on the faculty of the law school. In work­ing with the students, each prac­titioner v/ill take assignments from juvenile court judges and turn any state-provided compensation over to the law school. The practitioner-professors will continue to take a selection of paying private clients and would, in the same manner, use these cases as part of the clin­ical work with law students. The fees from these private cases

Continued, P. 8, Col. 1

Board Revamps Moot Ct Program

By STEPHEN E. SARACCO The Moot Court Board, which

is responsible for the operation of the Moot Court program has initi­ated various changes for the 69-70 school year.

The first year program has un­dergone an almost complete refor­mation. Previously, first year stu­dents were reqviired to write an appellate brief relying solely on their course in Legal Research and a limited amount of books on brief writing available in the library. Although there was benefit in the fact that students formulated their briefs through primarily indepen­dent initiative, the quality suffered because of lack of experience.

This year the first year students are helped in their efforts by the faculty and second and third year students. For the first time the issues of the problems are stated on the problem itself. Although there has been some criticism that the issues have been unclear or incomplete, they have at least been able to direct the first year student into the proper problem area re­garding legal issues with which he may be completely unfamiliar.

The. first-semester., was- devoted completely to the writing of the brief.' A class in brief writing was conducted by Mr. Lurie, faculty advisor of the board. Also a sam­ple brief was prepared by Jack Rossi, chairman of the board, in order to provide the first year stu­dents some direction in preparing their briefs.

The next phase is an oral cri­tique conducted by a faculty judge and two student judges. This phase has the two fold purpose of making the quality of the briefs better and preparing the students for the oral argument.

Although this practice is un­realistic as compared to genuine appellate procedure, it provides guidance which the first year stu­dents could not get from indepen­dent initiative.

The new system has been criti­cized by faculty and first year stu­dents alike. But it should be re­membered that there will be prob­lems with any new system that seeks to set precedent aside.

The first year program should primarily be focused on preparing the student for Reimel participa­tion which in turn prepares the student for authentic appellate procedure.

Reimel Program This year's Riemel program, con­

cerning a Selective Service prob­lem, ran into some unforseen diffi­culties. Two cases with substan­tially the same issues as this year's problem were recently decided by the Supreme Court of the United States. Professor Lurie received complaints that the aforementioned cases foreclosed the government team from winning on the merits. Solomon-like, Mr. Lurie changed

Continued, P. 8, Col. 3

Page 2 T H E V I L L A N O V A D O C K E T MARCH, 1970

From The Dean's Desk

As I See It... T» NEW DIRECTION, NEW ADVISORS.

The Editor NEW BOARD CHARACTERIZE VCLS

Dean Reuschlein

By HAROLD GILL REUSCHLEIN

As I write, I anticipate the next academic year, 1970-1971. It should be not merely an interesting year, but an exciting year in the best sense of the word.

Of course, all of us eagerly anticipate the completion and occupancy of the commodious addition to Garey Hall. The contractor is pleased with his progress to date, and, with good

fortune, we should see comple­tion of the building by February, 1971. It should be a delight to work and study in the new building. We shall have, for the first time in several years, ade­quate classroom facilities, much needed space for increased facul­ty, attractive quarters for all co-curricular activities, much en­larged and much improved li­brary facilities, a fine dining facility and a more commodious student lounge. Air conditioning throughout the new and existing

facility will not merely contribute to comfort but will remedy the now often intolerable condition created by noise from the Penn Central and highway traffic. We shall, of course, plan a significant dedicatory program of genuine interest to our stu­dents and alumni.

It goes without saying, that the provision of fine new physical facilities, the improvement of faculty salaries, the addition of new faculty and the expansion of seminar and other curricular programs means a substantial increase in the cost of operating the School of Law. I know it will come as no surprise to our students that, with added facilities, improved instructional programs and the inflationary spiral, tuition in the School will rise. I can say with justifiable pride that few law schools of comparable quality have operated on the moder­ate budget and with the low tuition which characterizes the School of Law at Villanvoa. In the world of privately-operated top quality law schools, the average tuition this year is about $2,140. We want to stay in the top quality league. To do so, we must gradually increase our tuition. Our tuition raises over the next several years will be modest — but they are inevitable. And for the additional sums we are compelled to collect, we shall deliver full value.

Begining with the current semester. Professor Peter W. Brown left full time teaching at the School to assume the post as Deputy Director of Community Legal Services. We are fortunate to have him continuing on a part-time basis and to have his guidance and assistance in the clinical activities which many of our students participate in enthusiastically. It is expected that several new faculty appointments will be made in the very near future. I am delighted to report that several of these appointments have already been made. We have been most anxious to appoint an alumnus and that we did in the person of Walter J. Taggart '68. Elsewhere in this issue you will read of the new clinical instructional program in the area of student representation of indigent juveniles. Lisa A. Richette will serve as director of the program with the rank of Clinical Professor, our first. She will have the assistance of Jerome E. Bogutz '62 as Adjunct Clinical Professor. The new program, operating academically from Garey Hall and clini­cally from the downtown office of the Villanova Law Associates in the Jenkins Memorial Library of the Philadelphia Bar Asso­ciation, will get under way during the summer of 1970. The new Clinical Program is made possible by virtue of a generous grant from the Council on Legal Education for Professional Responsibility, Inc. and supporting grants from the Philadel­phia Foundation and the Philadelphia Urban Coalition. Watch for the next issue of THE DOCKET for biographical data con­cerning new faculty appointees.

The Spring will be a busy time at the School of Law. On Friday, March 20th, the Annual Law Alumni Dinner will be held at Williamson's, atop the Barclay Building. It is always a great event and this year we aim to top all past efforts. Jim Gannon '66 is the dinner chairman and our speaker is the distinguished president-elect of the American Bar Association, Edward L. Wright of Little Rock, Arkansas, the man who, more than anyone else, is

The two editorials which ap­peared in the last issue of THE DOCKET presented an interesting parallel. One implied that the ad­ministration censored your paper. The other was an attempt by your paper to censor the administration.

In the editorial entitled, "In What Direction," you commented, "To maintain its credibility as an academic institution the Law School must scrupulously avoid supporting any political or moral issue." This portentious statement was made in reference to the decision of the faculty committee to excuse class attendance for those students wish­ing to take part in the Viet Nam Moritorium.

One can, of course, question whether your concern for the pur­ity of the Law School arose out of deep seated intellectual conviction or merely an opposing political philosophy. However, your state­ment has far more import as a mis­interpretation of the function of a graduate educational institution than it does as a comment on the Vietnam War.

Many law schools and universi­ties are making an effort to become more "relevant" to their students and to the surrounding environ­ment. This attempt, often merely by the selection of a curriculum, forces the administration and the faculty member who teaches the course to take a political and moral stand. Indeed, to continue to at­tract students and a faculty of a high caliber the Law School must be prepared to be more than a trade school. It must continue to offer programs which span the en­tire range of the economic and social spectrum. The study of Cor­porations must be tempered with that of the rights of the criminal defendant and Estate Planning with Poverty and the Law.

This is not to suggest that it should be the purpose of a law school to indoctrinate the student with a particular political philos­ophy. The goal should be to pro­duce attorneys who have had the widest and most complete exposure to the people and institutions which are effected by the law as well as to the law itself.

The danger of intimidation of the students by the teacher is slight. Law students are not so impressionable nor so in awe of the figure on the podium that a

By TERRY QUIRIN

Perhaps it might not be inaccur­ate to suggest that the Villanova Community Legal Services suffers from a mild form of schizophrenia. The "personalities" that trouble those who have charge of the or­ganization's direction are; 1) a service organization composed of "right-minded" students who want to do something about this society —a noble goal; 2) an integrated aspect of the legal curriculum de­signed to offer law students oppor­tunities to analyze and learn by in­volvement in actual litigation and problem-solving. This duality of supposed function interferes with projecting a place for the VCLS in the little cosmos that is Villanova Law School. Until we determine who we are, we will not know where we can go.

So elusive has been the effort to identify ourselves that, even as we worked for a recognized role in the curriculum, we acted as a place­ment center for "do-gooders" so that we could develop specific ideas about our purposes. For the past two years. Professor Peter Brown was our faculty moderator. He was a shaper of student attitudes and encouraged Villanova law stu­dents to view their curriculum critically. Together they devised programs and recruited students to assist the legal-social agencies of Philadelphia and Delaware Counties. Their purpose—to take the first long steps in formulating concrete proposals to modify the legal curriculum at Villanova Law School. (This is not to suggest that others were not evaluating the curriculum with a view toward change. But it is meant to suggest that students were, perhaps for the first time, actively involved.) Their hope—to gain some insight into the difficulties, advantages and

frank exchange of political and social views will easily persuade them.

The Law School has begun to meet the challenges. It has decided to turn out prepared citizens as well as competent lawyers. Your editorial suggests a step backward. Let us hope both the administra­tion and the paper will retain their right to disagree.

Laurence E. Hirsch

responsible for the adoption of the new Code of Profes­sional Responsibility of the American Bar Association. On April 2nd (Thursday), Ralph Nader will address a forum meeting at Garey Hall. Needless to say we expect to hang out the S.R.O. sign. The next day, Friday, April 3rd, will see the afternoon and evening devoted to the sixth annual VILLANOVA LAW REVIEW Symposium at Garey Hall. The topic is most timely, "National Population Programs and Policy: Social and Legal Implications." The participants are a dis­tinguished group headed by Dr. Carl S. Shultz, Director of the Office of Population and Family Planning, U. S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare. On Saturday afternoon, April 11th, we shall hold the final argument in the Reimel Appellate Moot Court Competition before a distinguished bench. The Chief Justice will be the Honorable Thurgood Marshall, Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States.

To our Alumni: — We expect to see you a'top the Barclay and at Garey Hall for these exciting programs and while you note these events for your calendar, remember our Building Fund Campaign if you have not already made your commit­ment. We need you and yours — now.

shortcomings of "clinical" educa­tion. After two years of concen­trated frustration, we have gained some needed experience and are better able to measure our expec­tations. Thus, it is necessary to resolve the conflict over our ap­propriate function before we can evaluate the course of our future actions.

This is a matter that the Stu­dent Board will have to consider before they can plan for the com­ing year. A new Board was re­cently elected from the Member­ship and includes Barbara Joseph, Frank Barach, Frank Bodell, Bill Bowkley, Lon Cobrin and Jeff Paul. To assist them, the VCLS now has three faculty advisors— Professors Abraham, Gianella and Shralow. These additional advisors mean that specific attention can be given to developing meaningful programs in both the criminal and civil areas. Most importantly, these members of the faculty can evalu­ate, from their own experience, the possibilities clinical programs sug­gest as additions to the curriculum. This is what we need and what we want. Properly supervised clinical activity will benefit the student in ways no course can. By committed participation, students will develop an advocate's image and frame of mind. This clarification of his fu­ture role in society could produce better lawyers.

VAIENTE TESTIFIES BEFORE PA HOUSE

Professor William D. Valente, president of the Archdiocesan Board of Education, recently testi­fied before a Pennsylvania House of Representatives committee in­vestigating tax exemptions for re­ligious, educational and charitable institutions.

In testifying, Prof. Valente stated that the contribution made by Catholic schools and charitable institutions is "huge compared to the tax revenue lost by exemp­tions" and that "any curtailment of the tax exempt status of real estate used for educational pur­poses by the diocesan school sys­tem would seriously affect the al­ready critical financial conditions of this system."

Noting that 257,000 children are in the See's elementary and sec­ondary schools, Prof. Valente said:

"The preservation of our school system today is dependent on the increased sacrifice of our Catholic people. Our community would be the loser if any action by the state in the area of tax exemptions should discourage this will to sac­rifice or depress the enthusiasm to continue."

"Without adverting to all of the implications which taxation of Church property suggests at a time when there is such insistence upon the independence of religion from state control," he added, "the practical consideration is appar­ent— that any tax diversion from Church organizations of the free­will offerings will to that extent reduce the funds available for the support of the school system."

MARCH, 1970 T H E V I L L A N O V A D O C K E T

DOCKET SPECIAL REPORT Pa{e 3

Editor's Note: At the roots of our society's chronic problem of urban upheaval and un­rest is the problem of juvenile delinquency. Juvenile delinquency is not a problem pecu­liar to the United States. However, the particular hybrid which Kas found its germi­nation and development in our overly popu­lated urban areas is exclusively American. Solution to this problem of juvenile delin­quency has been long in coming. Failure in approach, lack of financial backing and a penal approach to the whole problem has stymied its solution . The Docket now pre­sents a series of four articles which will present the problem and possible avenues of solution or reform to tackle this problem of delinquency before its repercussions reach catastrophic proportions.

—Peter Dang, Features Editor

The Philadelphia PrDhlem By STEVE KRAVITZ

The Youth Study Center of Philadelphia is primarily a juvenile detention facility and not, as its name would imply, a diagnostic center. Rehabilitative programs have not been instituted because the children are not there long enough to make them effective. The majority of its inmates are awaiting trial in juvenile court and generally are not available for more than thirty days. Others have already been tried and have been adj udged delinquent but due to overcrowding have not as yet been placed in one of the city-run institutions. A few are detained because the juvenile court has ordered that they undergo mental testing. The actual examinations are usually performed at area hospitals, the study center being utilized only for housing purposes. Those latter two groups are obvi­ously indefinite boarders at best.

The emphasis at the youth study center is on control. Ostensibly this orientation is attributed to the overcrowded conditions and the limited number of staff members. Not entirely so! In reality, administrative bungling and general neglect have resulted in a city sponsored ghetto within the Youth Study Center. The officials are more concerned with keeping the problem from worsening rather than in effecting a cure.

The upper floors of the center, where the children are detained smell like a locker room after a long game on a hot day. It is no secret why the children are dirty and they do not change clothes. Repeated visits to interview a particular

juvenile will find him attired in the same sweatshirt or uni­form. Clearly, crowds ^lone do "not cause these body odors.

There is little to do in the center. Generally the children are either forming up into lines to move to another area or are sitting around on the floor staring idly at each other. I did see a deck of cards once and a row of comic books. Of course, they can get "high." This is not surprising since informed sources estimate that there is as great a drug traffic in the Center as on the street. Moreover, the start of a fight in the center will prompt a quick appearance of switch blades, razors and other such weapons.

Before a child is admitted to the center, or even slated for trial, he and his parents must be interviewed at the youth study center by an "intake" officer. Families are kept waiting all day in a crowded, dimly lighted, and generally dreary hall­way which bears a close resemblance to a Broad Street subway stop in North Philadelphia. No reading matter is provided and there is nothing of interest on the wall. Little cognizance is taken of the fact that most of the families kept waiting are at the bottom of the economic ladder in the city making their absence from work financially catastrophic in many cases.

OFFICIALS EVADE REPORTER

Apparently, the officials at the center are mpre than a little worried about their performances because none are will­ing to talk about it. Case in point: Last semester I attempted to contact the Youth Study Center "intake" officers as part of my research for my seminar paper. This proved fruitless. I finally was able to speak to the head of the intake division who informed, me that he had no authority to speak to anyone about his job. ;He explained that clearance from "above" was neces­sary, which meant that I had to obtain approval from Dr. Leonard" Rosengarten, Deputy Administrator, Juveniles and Misdemeanors. It is likely that real clearance from "above" would have been easier to get. I never did get to speak to Dr. Rosengarten. His secretary told me that any request submitted to Dr. Rosengarten had to be in writing. Two hours after this conversation I personally delivered such a request to his secretary explaining that I was attempting to do a research paper on intake at the center and that I would appreciate being able to interview an intake officer. The following day, I was informed by Dr. Rosengarten's secretary that he had rejected my request.

The condition that exists at Philadelphia's Youth Study Center is by no means the worst or the best in the treatment of our juveniles. However, it does point out the general trend now existing in our delinquency system: control not rehabili­tation. Insufficient and ineffective staff and facilities have created a monster to cope with the most pertinent and delicate problem of our American social structure. This system has lost sight of the original goal which the state or city in its paternalistic attitude had in establishing such a center: solu­tion of youth's problems through understanding and human dignity.

Until the city and its people are aware of the problem and allocate adequate financial aid to reform such a system, staff and facilities, hope for a better juvenile system and hope for a better social, urban society is nil.

Page 4 T H E V I L L A N O V A D O C K E T MARCH, 1970

. . . created a ^yifjondter

to co^e with tLe

modt pertinent and

deiicate proLiem

our ..y^merican 6ociai

dtructure . . .

The Drug Dilemma By ARTHUR ROSENBAUM

Particularly in her urban centers, America's youth is using drugs illegally. This is about all those who have any contact or involvement with the problem agrees upon. A ple­thora of reasons for drug abuse are advanced ranging from the war in Viet Nam to disgust for hypocritical parents, to rejection of a society with all the wrong values and priorities. The youthful user most likely says he uses drugs because he likes to get high. Whatever the reasons are, what has created such a concern is the change in the patterns of drug abuse. For a long time it existed virtually only in a few big city ghettos, and it effects were felt only indirectly by drug related crimes. Now the young of all classes use drugs, and we are concerned and disturbed.

Most widely used is marijua.na, which is casually accepted by the juvenile population which knows that its use does not lead to heroin addiction and certain death. Also in current use are the amphetamines, ups, and barbiturates, downs; the hallucinogens, and narcotics. Use of narcotics, primarily hero­in, is increasing even among children as young as twelve.

Law enforcement people seem to see juvenile drug abuse as "criminal," though some express no interest in prosecuting the marijuana user, while others believe in stiff terms of im­prisonment even for first offenders. All believe that pushers should receive long terms; the pusher is a businessman they reason, and when the risks and costs of doing business exceed the fruits, he will go out of business. This overlooks the fact that many users also push drugs to support their habits.

Those who work with addicts and abusers see the problem as one involving the personality of the Juvenile. Drug abuse is a response to the fears and anxieties generated by a complex society. By getting high, the child avoids and masks the truth about himself and his failings and feelings.

Juvenile drug abuse poses vexing problems for the Law, and to the lawyer who is bothered by, or concerned with the youthful drug abuser. Many children are consciously breaking anti-drug laws. They do not believe what they are doing to be wrong. To be sure, many recognize the dangers of the hallu­cinogens, of the dangerous drugs (the amphetamines and bar-bituates) and of the narcotics, but there is a universal faith in marijuana, that it is harmless and beneficial. Adults have abused the dangerous drugs for years with the condonation of doctors who promisciously renew prescriptions, yet society has chosen to prosecute only the juvenile abuser. Youth has proven to itself that marijuana is physiologically harmless and non-addictive, and laughs at courts which have meted out greater punishment for possession of marij uana than for man­slaughter. The problem is that laws have been based more upon superstition and misinformation than good sense the facts which no one has yet bothered to find. Will the enforce­ment of such laws endanger respect for the Law among the young? The effect of enforcement on juveniles is quite absurd. In Philadelphia the youthful offender is most likely placed on probation, and if he is careful, not likely to be caught again. There is no facility, or apparent interest, to help the youth who has a serious drug problem. The youth needs support, not to be run through the insensitive machinery of juvenile court only to be put back on the street with one more problem.

Amelioration of the problem of juvenile drug abuse does not seem likely for several reasons. One is that there is no agreement as to what the problem is, and another is that there is less agreement on what to do about it. It is suggested by Police and educators that children be educated about the drugs and the dangers of use. Those who work with addicts generally believe that such education would be useless or even harmful depending upon its presentation. Children know about the drugs from their own experience and are not likely to believe what someone with no experience has to say if it is contrary.

The truth that heroin produces a pleasant high and does not become addictive unless taken often will not likely dis-cpurage a youth from trying heroin. Actually the knowledge that using it once or twice does not lead to an early death as has been long taught, may lead to experimentation which may result in addiction, a fatal overdose, or hepatitis. The educa­

tion which may have a posit the nature of addictive beha tions, and the child does not should be educated to realiz( even though not physiologica ior. Abuse of drugs is not n but is a response to person They also suggest the forma tion groups for youngsters ir these groups is to help childr mon fears, anxieties, and ina ents and everything else, and themselves, to be able to ex fully the realization of this g to complicated defenses or dr can function better in societ;

Unfortunately, while the problem, that is about all th( help the drug abuser. In thi juvenile court judge can coi Apparently efforts to preveni not surprising considering t teach and believe that wh: untrue, distorted, or unprove

It will be interesting t( turns out.

Towards £i By JAMEI

Juvenile institutions are involuntary population of thos for delinquent behavior. Thii fields where rehabilitative in the institutional system fo

GUIDANCE. Many offic in the United States do not C( in detention institutions. The tion entails the belief that de particular time. This belief j time and energy expended is and shelter for the juvenile, been an increasing change ol centers regarding this point. . to play a much more importai and philosophy.

It has been proven that hancing the child's susceptibil apprehensive when he first er he is encountering an environ environment. He often finds living becomes very tedious a emotional problems that inhib from the rehabilitative proces ly resist all possible help whil< the boy feels the need to talk trust. This is the job of the c( between the forbearing dete convincing the boy that his Unfortunately, there are few tutions. Practically speaking, concerned, he must manage consequence that he has time child as an individual. This " is the type most prevalent in j size of the institution and the guidance virtually impossible.

Fortunately, our more j are able to provide adequate ir counselor assumes the role of attempts to explore with the c

The style of the boy's re generally quite different froi adults, and to transform the I that the child is more familial

'0 MARCH, 1970 T H E V I L L A N O V A D O C K E T Pagt 5

e a positive effect is to teach children of ive behavior. "Addict" has bad connota-loes not want to bear that label. Children to realize that habitual use, regular use, siologically compelled, is addictive behav-is not motivated by a desire to get high, ) personal problems, fears, or anxieties, le formation of encounter and confronta-gsters in the community. The purpose of ilp children to know that they share com-, and inadequacies about school, sex, par-else, and to help them to be honest among lie to express feelings and hurts. Hope-of this goal will lessen the need to resort ses or drugs, and will result in people who n society. vhile there is great concern for the drug it all there is. There are few facilities to r. In this area, there is none to which a t can commit one who needs treatment. > prevent drug abuse are failing, which is dering that those doing the prevention hat which their subjects know to be unproven.

ssting to see how the "pot generation"

s Enliqhtenment ' y JAMES ROSENBERG

ions are charged with containing a largely n of those ostracized from the community Lor. This article will explore the possible itative treatment can be accomplished i^stem for such delinquents, my officials in the detention institutions do not comprehend the need for guidance >ns. Their basic philosophy toward deten-' that detention is merely "storage" for a belief yields the result that most of the

nded is spent on providing food, clothing jvenile. Fortunately, however, there has iiange of view among juvenile detention 5 point. As a result, guidance is beginning important role in our detention procedure

en that guidance is instrumental in en-sceptibility to rehabilitation. The child is i first enters the detention home because environment which is alien to his former

^n finds that the routine of institutional edious and routine. There are also many lat inhibit the child from fully benefitting e process. Often, the child may outward-elp while inwardly craving it. Invariably, I to talk with someone he believes he can of the counselor. He must bridge the gap ng detention officials and the child by ;hat his chief aim is to aid the child, are few such counselors in juvenile insti-jeaking, even if the counselor is honestly nanage a large group of boys with the as time for just brief contacts with each . This "overseer" concept of supervision ilent in youth detention institutions. The and the ratio of boys to staff make actual possible. more progressive juvenile institutions

jquate individual counseling. Usually the I role of a friend to the child and as such ith the child the nature of his difficulties, boy's relationship with the counselor is ent from that experienced with other rm the therapeutic relationship into one familiar with, the child may attempt to

provoke the counselor into acting punitively towards him. The counselor's objective, then, is to maintain his rapport with the child while avoiding the possibility of hardening the child's defenses towards him, as a counselor, in the future. However, the counselor's unwillingness to punish the child often dimin­ishes his status in the eyes of the child. In other words, the counselor's divesting himself of such punitive attitudes for the sake of the therapeutic process introduces an air of non-reality into the relationship that many children have difficulty accepting and understanding. The counselor and his loyalty to the traditional therapeutic style may indirectly excite certain boys into unusually serious forms of antisocial behavior.

A GROUP SOLUTION

In view of the difficulties encountered by individual coun­selors, it is perhaps understandable why there has been a re­cent trend toward group therapy in many juvenile institutions. Group therapy does not cast the child in the role of the victim and it does not ignore or implicitly tolerate antisocial behavior among the participants. Rather, it involves him in a process that is familiar and quite acceptable to him. Group therapy avoids many of the difficulties that individual therapy presents in working with mildly antisocial children.

In group therapy the counselors have a definite discussion plan for each session. Often, other topics of considerable interest to the child would emerge and take precedence over planned objectives. In all sessions, the counselors strive to present a completely frank picture of the difficulties the boys would encounter upon release. They consider it particularly important to avoid building up unrealistic expectations or aspirations.

There are, however, some problems with group counseling. It is often assumed that the group participants will benefit from their participation in the group counseling sessions. Unfortunately, there is not always true. Due to the fact that many group members possess psychiatric and psychological problems, they might not respond well to group therapy. In fact, the rehabilitative technique of group counseling may have a tendency to aggravate their condition and become a hinder-ance to their own therapy. Also, individuals because of their psychological problems may have an adverse effect on the group. Members of the group who are sound mentally may be influenced by the psychotic members of the group.

There is also the problem that group therapy will increase the neurosis of the individual because of the group concept it­self. Group sessions increase the neurotic fear of individuality and the neurotic wish to hide in the group—to do what every­body else does. Instead of strengthening individuality, group therapy hinders individuality because it depends on group con­sensus which is made possible by several individuals thinking and perceiving processes in the same way. Often, in the group sessions, there is a tendency to generalize in respect to treat­ment rather than to view the unique problems of a particular individual. This is necessitated because the problems of one individual may be so unique as to preclude the group generally from benefitting from the discussion.

USING CASTOFF TEACHERS

EDUCATION. The school must be utilized as the initial step in the rehabilitation of the child. The teacher attempts to understand and begins to unravel the negative perception that blocks the child's adjustment and minimizes his learning poten­tial. The distortion in interpersonal relationships can be rein­forced or limited by the teacher's interaction with the child.

The role of the teacher in a detention school setting can never be overemphasized. He or she is expected to teach children subject mater and at the same time avoid imposing new tensions and frustrations. These children arrive with a history of school difficulties and bring with them a heavy load •of negative feelings toward teachers, classrooms, and schools. The teacher is told that he must be sympathetic with the children on one hand but then is confronted with a classroom loaded with youth whose conduct will require the imposition of strict discipline.

Since the custody requirements of detention preclude the use of outside public schools to provide a special school within the detention home, some detention institutions dispense with •school altogether if they fail to secure teachers from the Board

of Education. Others are willing to take whatever castoffs the public school gives them. These teachers usually know little about education, less about the delinquent child, and still less about the particular problems the detention group presents.

The problem is that few teachers come to the detention school with truly extensive training in the dynamics of delin­quent behavior. Some have had a course or two in child psychology. This, however, is far from specific preparation to cope with the degree and variety of behavior problems which will confront the teacher daily in the detention school class­room. The question here is: where should this training be given? It is my considered opinion that it should be given as part of the education department's curriculum in the universi­ties and at the institutions themselves. The universities should provide special courses to enable the teachers in detention institutions to cope successfully with the problems that they will encounter. Also, the detention schools should provide training for its teachers to aid them in carrying out a most challenging and difficult assignment. The general subject of "on the job" training for school personel should be aimed not so much at increasing skills, which is the teacher's stock in trade, but at deepening and extending his understanding of the needs and problems of delinquent children and at causing this knowledge to be applied for therapeutic programming and handling. High frustration tolerance and a sensitivity to emo­tional situations without overinvolvement are requirements that are not listed as average teachers' requisites but are of the utmost importance in this field. Fortunately, some deten­tion institutions' superintendents refuse to take public school faculty castoffs and are becoming more articulate in appealing to school authorities for teachers trained in special or excep­tional child education. They are seeking teachers who have not only highly developed proficiency, but also the special personal qualifications needed for successful classroom work with disturbed youngsters.

In a detention setting, the objective should be to fit the school to the child, rather than the child to the school. The detention schools should help the teacher keep his focus upon the child, not upon the subject matter. In the detention insti­tution, the need for this is imperative. It must be realized that achieving a desirable balance between keeping an eye on the child and teaching subject matter is difficult. Many children upon leaving the detention institution will return to the public schools where they will be expected to have achieved a certain level of academic proficiency. Lack of emphasis upon subject matter may make it impossible for the child to fit into a community school and such failure may cause a child again to become delinquent. For example, it is of tremendous impor­tance that the child who cannot read learn to read at least simple materials if he is to make an adequate social adjust­ment. Thus, it is necessary to have extremely capable teachers to achieve this delicate balance.

Ideally, it is thought that the detention schools should be operated on a twelve month basis. A no less intensive, individ­ualized program, adapted to the child's social and academic needs should be conducted during periods when the public schools are not in session. The school budget should not be reduced during the summer months. Classroom population should average ten to twelve and not exceed fifteen. Also, teachers should be included in the dentention institution's staff development meetings and should work closely with the other members of the staff. Finally, the detention school should report to the child's own school and to the court, evidence of the child's progress, achievements, and special problems in the detention period. However, realistically speaking, these ideals are not accomplished in most detention schools.

While interviewing Mr. Joyce, a teacher at the Youth Development Center at Cornwell Heights, I asked him if these procedures were being accomplished. Regretfully, he replied in the negative. Because of the teacher shortage and the lack of classroom space, the classroom population fluctuated be­tween twenty-five and thirty. He stated that because the teachers were involuntarily assigned to the Youth Develop­ment Center by the Philadelphia Board of Ed'ication, many of the teachers were unenthusiastic about their work and this resulted in a great deal of absenteeism on their part. The result of this was that the boys were being denied adequate instruction in the classroom.

He also mentioned a lack of communication between the detention school, the courts, and the child's own school. In fact,

'.J'

Pace 6 T H E V I L L A N O V A D O C K E T MARCH, 1970

until last year, the detention school was not in the practice of even sending a report of the child's progress to the child's own school. This lack of communication would result in the boy unnecessarily repeating a grade on his return to the public school. This situation would yield the result that the boy would replace any sense of achievement at the detention school with a sense of failure at the public school.

Thus, the direction of enlightened administration in the field of juvenile delinquency would be to strengthen our juvenile programs in philosophy and staff towards approaching a practical means between realistic financial limits and the ideal approach to delinquency in the fields of guidance and education.

The Delinquent In His Commnnity

B y JUDY KRUEGER Some general remarks may be made on how community

treatment for the delinquent can be improved. First, a critical examination of present programs is necessary. Both psycho­therapeutic and sociological programs need to be more effi­ciently measured for their effectiveness. New techniques must be devised where old methods prove unworkable. In the area of psychotherapy, therapists for many years have been ques­tioning the effectiveness of traditional psychotherapeutic tech­niques on "acting out" children. Yet today, with few exceptions, community agencies continue to use these same methods. Sociologically orientated projects have produced some dramatic new efforts, particularly in trying to reduce the delinquency problem in lower economic areas. However, the results sug­gest that here too a more sophisticated approach must be taken. The behaviorists' approach is also too superficial since the casual forces of a delinquent's personality makeup and/or cultural milieu are ignored.

Wh&t ideally needs to be done then is to find the specific variables in a treatment program which will work best with a particular delinquent. For example, the California Treatment Project is working towards that end. Unlike the shotgun approach of most communities, this program attempts to sys­tematically determine what variables will most successfully work in the rehabilitation of a particular delinquent. The variables which were considered are: 1) the delinquent, 2) the setting for treatment, 3) the treatment model and 4) the therapist.

First, then, delinquents were differentiated. The classifi­cation system utilized is based on Interpersonal Maturity Level (I-level) theory. The original theoretical formulation described a sequence of personality integrations which develop in normal childhood. A child was placed into a particular maturity level on the basis of his ability to understand what was happening between himself and others. Seven successive stages of inter­personal maturity were formulated. These ranged from the least mature, a child who has little control over his emotions and their effect on what happens to him, to the ideal of social maturity which is seldom reached. The theorists felt that each level was defined by a crucial interpersonal problem which had to be solved before further progress could occur and an individual could become 'fixed' at a particular level.

Within each level subtypes were classified according to a response set. Thus, while a particular group may have a com­mon level of perceptual differentiation, individuals respond to their perceptions in different ways. The subtypes characterized children as essentially passive, aggressive, neurotic, anxious, conforming, manipulating or a combination of these.

The settings were also differentiated in an attempt to develop treatment environments which were specific to the management and growth needs of a particular subgroup.

In one research project, two settings were compared; the homogeneous arrangement with boys of the same subtype placed together and the traditional heterogeneous unit. Homo-genity was found to consistently decrease unit management problems.

A second study involved the use of group homes. This use of out of home placement was based on the observation that some types of delinquents in some types of settings ap­pear to have little or no alternative to delinquency.

A child whose major way of relating to the world is con­formity to the power which surrounds him may have little alternative to delinquency in a high delinquency area.

The goals of the Group Home Project were to develop five different types of group homes specifically related to the needs of a particular subtype. (A description of these homes has not as yet been published.)

Two differential treatment models were also compared with an institutional setting, with homogeneous living units by subtype.

The fourth variable in differential treatment is the match­ing of clients with workers. This is based on the premise that, "few, if any, workers relate equally well with all types of de­linquents or are equally comfortable with the range of treat­ment styles and stances required by the full variety of oflTenders." Thus eflforts were made to match a worker to a particular subtype. However, as yet there has been no research study on the unique contribution of matching per se.

Besides researching the specific effect of variables, a separate program was put into operation to determine the feasibility of community based treatment as opposed to institutionalization, i.e. what offenders could be left in the community. Youths who had been adjudicated delinquent by the courts were randomly assigned to the C.T.P. project or handled in the conventional manner and used as controls.

The general treatment model was a specialized program of supervision. First a diagnostic evaluation was made and maturity level determined. Then, according to the diagnostic indications, various casework services were used such as coun­seling, tutoring, group therapy, etc.

The case worker was placed with the child at a particular center all day. He was able to observe the child in a variety of social settings and alter treatment as progress occurred. (Each worker had a caseload of 8 in a homogeneous grouping.)

In this study, researchers came to the conclusion that: The operational feasibility of treating a large portion of the delinquent population in the community, without prior insti­tutionalization has been clearly demonstrated.

Although the degree of success varied according to sub­type all groyps were found to be suitable for community treat­ment. On the whole, those offenders under treatment for six months or more showed a decrease in the frequency of mis­behavior. The experimental cases averaged 47 months per failure while the control group averaged twenty-six months per failure.

This project, then, stands out as a sophisticated experi­mental aproach to community treatment. First, instead of devising one treatment plan and then applying it to a broad category of delinquents, the differential model looks at both the variables in the delinquent's makeup and in the treatment. Second, the emphasis is on research, to determine what vari­ables will be most effective in treating a particular delinquent.

As the results have shown, most delinquents can be effectively treated in the community. This program should serve as a challenge for other areas to follo^y in formulating new ways to deal with delinquency.

MARCH, 1970 T H E V I L L A N O V A D O C K E T

Rugby Emerges As Popular Sport—Dowd Named Coach

By BILL GORMLEY This spring will mark the be­

ginning of rugby at Villanova Law School. Rugby is originally an English game, and can simply be described as football without equip­ment.

The Rugby team is under the leadership of the team Moderator, Prof. William Valente, and the Coach, Prof. Donald Dowd. Coach Dowd recently returned from Eng­land, where he made a systematic and intense study of the game, and therefore has a deep fount of knowledge about the fine points of the sport.

Coach Dowd has been running the team through grueling prac­tice sessions every Saturday morn­ing on the Seminary field. One such practice was even conducted when the temperature was 15°, which caused one player to leave the field in fear of frostbite. In spite of this adversity Coach Dowd has emerged as a Vince Lombard! figure to the players.

The players, many of them for­mer college standouts at sports ranging from soccer to swimming, have provided more than an ade­quate nucleus to field a team. Alan Lieberman, who will be play­ing hooker for the squad, is a for­mer decathlon champion. Buzz Shuman, the perpetual youth, will probably be the largest participant

in any of the games.

Other members of the team in­clude: Tom Ziomek, Frank Tamu-lonis, Tom Traud, Tim O'Neill, Bob Mahoney, Mike Kane, Don Grasso, Bill Crosswell, Barry Brown, Carl Buchholz, John Roney, Francis Nyhan, Nick Paulo, Mike Henry, Bob White, Oliver Tract, and Tom Hitchcock.

There will be only three official games. The most important of which will be the 15th of March against the undergraduates. Each game will be followed by a party and most probably the parties will be open not only to the players and their friends, but to all members of the law school attending the games. The two men responsible for the social events will be the club's public relations men Ter-rence Quirin and Mike Stiles, a combination reminiscent of Bar-num and Bailey. Other individuals who are aiding in organizing the rugby team are Captain Bill Gorm­ley, General Manager C. Francis Fitzpatrick, Choral Director Harry Knafic, and Communications Di­rector Larry Leiser.

Everyone associated with the rugby team is especially grateful to the Student Bar Association who alloted money to buy balls, and to Mr. and Mrs. Gerard L. Gormley of Buena, N. J., who do­nated the game uniforms.

PRDFESSDR DDWD ADDRESSES AfflUAL CDIF DUVNER

The Eighth Annual Order of the Coif Dinner and Lecture was held on February 6, 1970, in the student lounge of Garey Hall, Villanova University. The Coif Address was given by Professor Donald W. Dowd of the Villanova School of Law and was entitled "Anglo-American Law and Lawyers: a consideration of the hyphen."

During the dinner, nine new members elected from the Class of 1969 were inducted into the Villa­nova Chapter of the Order of the Coif. They included; William E. Benner, Edward J. Ciechon, Jr., Mark S. Dichter, Edward G. Fitz­gerald, Jr., Robert R. Reeder, Thomas C. Riley, Andre J. Sas-soon, David A. School and Joseph A. Torregrossa.

At the same time, the society in­stalled Professor Howard R. Lurie of the Villanova Law School facul-

HISTORY MAKING SCHOOL COOPERATION — The Philadelphia Public Board of Education recently made statements endorsing the principle of public aid to subsidizing the teaching of "secular subjects" in Catholic Schools. An alliance of the two school systems will provide mutual support of efforts to secure additional public funds to provide for adequate school systems. Pictured here after their announcement to cooperate in solving common problems are (1. to r.): Msgr. Edward T. Hughes, archdiocesan superintendent of schools; Prof. Wil­liam D. Valente, archdiocesan Board of Education president; Richardson Dilworth, Board of Public Education president, and Dr. Mark Shed, superintendent of Philalelphia public schools.

Resolved: The Nomination Of Judge G. ^ V Harrold Carswell Should Be Confirmed V

ty as a member and bestowed an honorary membership upon the Honorable Theodore L. Reimel, Court of Common Pleas, Philadel­phia.

The officers of the organization are John J. Cannon '62, Joseph F. Doyle '64, and Jane L. Hammond '65, president, vice-president and secretary, respectively. To qualify for membership selection in the Or­der, a graduating student must have been within the top ten per cent of his class and also must have contributed significantly to the Law Review.

With the establishment of a chapter of the Order of the Coif at Villanova in 1961, the law school obtained a dual distinction in be­coming both the youngest law school to receive a Coif chapter and the first Catholic institution ever to be so honored.

AFFIRMATIVE By RICHARD S. GEBELEIN

The nomination of Circuit Judge G. Harrold Carswell as Associate Justice of the Supreme Court should be confirmed.

It is the President's prerogative to appoint the Chief Justice and the Associate Justices of the Supreme Court. While it has been suggested that the best road to the Supreme Court is through friendship with the President, Presidents Eisen­hower and Nixon have avoided this form of personal patronage by fol­lowing the policy of appointing Federal Court Judges to the High Court. It has also long been the custom that Supreme Court nomi­nees have generally reflected the legal and political philosophy of the presidents who have appointed them. Indeed the choice of the president has rarely been chal­lenged on the basis of his political or philosophical beliefs, since the early days of the republic.

Judge Carswell was chosen be­cause he met several of the criteria set by the President. The primary criteria of the President was that the nominee be a strict construc­tionist. This Judge Carswell cer­tainly is. Furthermore, Judge Carswell is young, he is a compe­tent jurist, and he has not en­gaged in financial dealings while on the bench (a congressionally mandated criteria which few Fed­eral Judges could meet).

It has been argued in several of the popular news weeklies and be­fore the Senate Committee that since Judge Carswell is not a Holmes, Brandeis or Warren, he should not be confirmed. This would be a valid argument only if one were committed to the idea of an activist court. If one were committed to that philosopy then any conservative judge would not be held in high esteem. The differ­ence in ideology to a large extent centers on role of the judge. The strict constructionist, especially at the District Court level would fol­low precedent and be very reluc­tant to forge new ground, while an activist would do the reverse. As a result each time the Supreme Court would advance one step, it

NEGATIVE would probably do so by reversing lower court opinions. It would seem likely therefore that a re­versal does not necessarily imply a lack of understanding of the law as it is, but rather bespeaks a respect for the principle of stare decisis. This has been the fault of Judge Carswell in the eyes of the activist. •

It is necessary at this time to mention that the President in his campaign had stated that he would appoint strict construction­ists to the Court. It should also be noted that the activist Supreme Court has aroused much contro­versy throughout the nation. Its "prayer" decisions have been so hotly debated that they have led almost two-thirds of the states to call for a Constitutional Conven­tion to remedy them. The decisions on Criminal Law have helped to make the phrase "law and order" a necessary element of any politi­cal campaign. The President promised that he would appoint a non-activist Court and the people elected him.

Another reason for the confirma­tion of Judge Carswell is that he is a Southerner. At this time when so many of the Court's decisions will bear most heavily on the South, the South is not truly rep­resented on the Court. The South as an area lacks respect for the Court. Part of this is due to a feeling that the Court is anti-Southem, or does not understand the problems of the South as a region. The presence of a South­erner on the Court could help to ease this problem. It would assure the South that its side was being heard. It could, perhaps, be a step toward the acceptance by the South of the legitimacy of the Court's decisions.

In conclusion, it would appear that considering the President's prerogative as to the philosophy of his nominee, the feeling in the na­tion favorable to a more conserva­tive Court, the benefit to be de­rived from the presence of a mod­erate Southerner on the Court, and the lack of any compeling reason to the contrary. Judge Carswell should be confirmed.

By ROBERT S. KANT "I am compelled to conclude that

this nominee presents the most slender credentials of any man put forward in this century for the Supreme Court." So spoke Louis H. Pollack, Dean of the Yale Law School, after studying the legal opinions of Judge G. Harrold Carswell, President Nixon's latest nominee to the Supreme Court. It is this lack of personal credentials as well as an insensitivity to civil rights causes which dictate that Mr. Carswell's nomination be re­jected.

Carswell's racial attitudes are evident. In 1948 he made a blat­antly racist speech in which he espoused segregation and white supremacy. He has been criti­cised for personally insulting both civil rights and black attorneys. Professor Leroy D. Clark of New York University Law School, a black former NAACP counsel, who has appeared before Mr. Carswell on numerous occasions character­ized him as a "racist" and a "mediocre judge." A Yale doctoral dissertation categorizing 31 federal district judges of the Fifth Circuit listed Carswell as a segregationist. Finally, Judge Carswell has been reversed by the rather conserva­tive Fifth Circuit in 60% of his civil rights decisions.

Mr. Carswell also lacks the in­tellectual and personal qualifica­tions that one would expect of a Supreme Court nominee. His aca­demic achievements were far from outstanding. He has never written a legal article. His four years of private practice were not particu­larly distinguished. As a District Judge, a politically motivated se­lection, many of his decisions can only be explained by racism or judicial incompetence or both.

It would seem that Judge Cars­well's only qualifications are that he owns no stocks, a somewhat new criteria for the Court but one which the Nixon talent scouts felt would avoid another Haynsworth debacle, and the fact that his ju­dicial ideology is so engrained that he will not "mature" on the Court as did several of President Eisen­hower's appointments. The tragedy is that such an inferior nomination was made by an attorney.

T H E V I L L A N O V A D O C K E T MARCH, 1970

ALUMNI FINDER With The Alum It's Up ... Up And Away!

1957 Francis Richard O'Hara, has been

moved by his employer, Gulf Oil Company, to London, England where he will be engaged in general corporate work relating to all of Gulf's activities in Europe, the Middle East and Africa.

Joseph R. McDonald, terminated his general practice in Allentown, Penna. in July, 1968 and moved to Arizona. He successfully took the Arizona Bar examination in Febru­ary, 1969, with a mark which was third highest in the state. He is an associate with the firm of Chand­ler, Tullar, Udall and Richmond in Tucson, Arizona.

1958 Thomas P. Kennedy, presently

legal counsel in the office of Auditor General, Robert Casey, Common­wealth of Penna., has served as editor of the Lackawanna Jurist, a bar association publication, and as U. S. commissioner for the Middle District of Pennsylvania.

1959 James J. DeMarco, in September

1969, established a partnership with Richard A. DeMichele, a 1957 grad­uate of Villanova Law School, in Philadelpliia, Pennsylvania.

1960 David H. Moskowitz, is repre­

senting a group of Taxpayers who have brought an action against the Danherst Corporation for approxi­mately five million dollars in rela­tion to the development of Fairless Hills, Pennsylvania. This suit was the subject of an article in Phila­delphia Magazine in December 1968.

1961 Thomas J. Ward, and his wife

announce the birth of their fifth • child, Jeffrey Richard, born June 26, 1969.

•Continued from P. 1, Col. 4-would likewise go to the law school.

The juvenile court project an­swers a crying need for law stu­dent participation in the Philadel­phia Juvenile Court System, which hears nearly thirteen thousand cases each year. Nearly 90% of juveniles charged with delinquency are too poor to afford counsel. Since the U. S. Supreme Court rul­ing in Gault over two years ago, the only permanent plan instituted for juvenile representation is one recently adopted by agreement be­tween the City of Philadelphia and the Voluntary Defender's Associa­tion. Under this arrangement fif­teen staff lawyers will be assigned to handle all indigent juveniles. The clinic, operating independent­ly, will help to relieve part of their caseload.

There are also mandates for the compensable appointment of priv­ate counsel under Assembly Act 438 (Sections 1 and 2, 19 P.S. 791-795) where the Defenders can­not properly represent a needy per­son "because of conflict of interest or other sufficient reason." Such appointments have been made not only in situations involving multi­ple defendants, but also where the defendant has been charged with serious acts arising out of dis­puted factual circumstances re­quiring investigation and research. Villanova Law Associates, with the services of a fulltime investigator and a man-pool of 25 researchers, appears in an ideal position to reap such appointments.

When these appointments are re­ceived by the Director, one or two law students will receive immedi­ate assignment to the case. The

1963 Thomas F. Caffrey, has formed

a new partnership, Reardon and Caffrey, located in Lawrence, Mass.

Gerald P. Lally, and his wife are the proud parents of their third son Kevin, bom March 27, 1969. Gerald is the president of the Hoboken Bar Association.

1964 Roger S. Wolfe, and his wife an­

nounce the birth of their second daughter, Suzanne, bom March 14, 1969. 1965

Edmund L. Pantani, has opened his own office in New Haven, Conn. He is also the father of a baby girl, Mari Terese, born May 10, 1969.

Howard L. Gleit, who is an as­sociate with Pepper, Hamilton and Scheetz, received his LL.M. in Tax­ation at New York University in 1969. 1966

Paul H. Ostien, Jr., besides being a partner in his law firm, Arose-mena and Ostien, which is located in Panama City, Republic of Pana­ma, is also president and chairman of the board of Panama Develop­ment Company, Inc. This Corpora­tion is presently engaged in the development of four islands in the Carribbean and a hotel resort on the Pacific Coast of Panama.

Barbara R. Muehleib, opened her own law office on October 1, 1969, in Philadelphia.

Robert V. Mairone, has become a partner in the firm of Blatt, Blatt and Consalvo, in Atlantic City, N. J. in January 1969.

Adrienne Arsht, past alumni edi­tor of THE DOCKET, is now em­ployed by Trans World Airlines in New York City. At last report, she appears to be a big part of that "Million Dollar Bonus" team.

ALUMNI LUNCHEON. In conjunction with the annual convention of the Philadelphia Bar Association, many of the alumni gathered at the Union League Club for a luncheon.

students will be responsible for field investigation, interviewing of witnesses, and preparation of legal memoranda, motions, and trial briefs. During the course of the program, each law student will work on at least four cases. The Director may make additional as­signments from time to time ac­cording to the ability and interests of the individual students. At the end of the final year of the pro­gram, it is hoped that V.L.A. will have participated in more than two hundred cases.

The Director will appear for each defendant with the law stu­dent or students participating as associate counsel. In no situation involving litigation in a court of record will the student be unsuper­vised, or unaccompanied by the Di­rector or the Assistant Director.

Mrs. Richette believes a juvenile clinical course is especially suited for law students. "We are starting with a juvenile and not an adult criminal clinic because it answers a great need and provides valuable learning in a more idealized set­ting. The juvenile court proce­dures aren't as rigid and the Dis­trict Attorneys tend to be younger and more understanding, reducing the prospect of a truly hostile ad­versary. Moreover, I feel the stu­dents will communicate well with their young clients. All of these are factors accommodating student adjustment to litigation."

Mrs. Richette will devote herself on a full-time basis to the program and will be Villanova Law School's first Clinical Professor of Law. Mr. Bogutz will continue with his private practice and will be an Adjunct Clinical Professor.

1967 Michael J. Leyden is working for

the Federal Bureau of Investiga­tion in Detroit, Michigan. He and his wife announce the birth of their daughter, Erin Shea, on March 4, 1969.

Joseph M. O'Malley resigned as special agent for the FBI in March of last year to become an attorney with the Reading Company. His wife is expecting their second child in March, 1970.

Joseph J. Rink, after being dis­charged from the Army in May, 1969, began full time studies for an LL.M. in Taxation at New York University.

David C. Drew, the executive director of Winooski Vermont's Model Cities Program, was mar­ried on July 4, 1969.

John F. Paczkowski, presently with the law firm of Paczkowski and Paczkokski of Dracut and Tewksbury, Massachusetts, and his wife announce the birth of their third child, John Steven, on August 10, 1969.

James J. McGrath, who is work­ing for the U. S. Treasury Dept. in Indianapolis, Indiana, and his wife announce the birth of Jenni­fer on November 18, 1969.

Richard G. Greiner and his wife announce the birth of their first child, Richard, Jr., on June 7, 1969. Lt. Greiner is serving in the Navy Judge Advocate General's Corps and is stationed at San Diego, California.

James R. Rowley, former assist­ant to the Executive Vice-President of the American Stock Exchange, has accepted a position with Rey­nolds and Co. in New York as As­sociate Director of Compliance. He

Continued from P. 1, Col. 5 in part the issues of the problem to obviate any effect that the recent Supreme Court decisions might have on the Reimel problem. Al­though this far from satisfied every­one, it was the only practical solution.

The bench for this year's final will be presided over by Justice Thurgood Marshall of the U. S. Supreme Court. Sitting with Mr. Justice Marshall will be Justice Benjamin Jones of the Supreme Court of Pa. and Judge Arlen Adams who was recently appointed to the U. S. Court of Appeals (3rd Circuit).

has also been recently elected President of General Tire Service, Inc. and Two-Fourteen Realty As­sociates in Washington, Penna.

Sandra R. Sernak, an associate of the Scranton, Pennsylvania law firm of Gelb, Notarianni and Mul-laney, has become the first woman assistant city solicitor in the his­tory of Scranton and the first law­yer who resides outside the city to hold that post. Miss Sernak, of Duryea, Pennsylvania, was ap­pointed to the post by newly chosen solicitor and associate attorney John Dunn.

Robert J. Nettune, of the New York City law firm of Olwine, Chase, O'Donnell and Wehyer, has received an LL.M. in International Law from NYU Graduate School of Law and is presently in the midst of pursuing a second LL.M. degree in Taxation at the same school. In addition, Mr. Nettune is a member of both the New York and District of Columbia Bars.

Patrick J. O'Connor of the Phila­delphia law firm of Pepper, Hamil­ton and Scheetz, was married to Miss Marie Mahoney on March 1, 1969.

1968 Joan N. Simon, presently with

the U. S. Department of Justice, Antitrust Division in New York City, is pursuing the LL.M. pro­gram in Trade Regulation at NYU Graduate School of Law. She is also a member of both Pennsyl­vania and Illinois Bars.

Paul G. Conway and his wife announce the birth of their first child in December, 1969. Captain Conway is serving with the Armed Forces in Viet Nam.

Richard S. Bank, of the Philadel­phia law firm of Bank and Mine-hart, is working for an acquittal in the case of United States vs. Den­nis Jerome Williams, a Selective Service case, in which the composi­tion of the draft board was chal­lenged and a judgment of acquittal requested on these grounds. An acquittal, if obtained on these grounds, would create new stand­ards for the Selective Service Boards across the nation.

Ian H. Kravitz has recently joined the Allied Chemical Corpor­ation in New York City as a tax attomey and is also a June, 1971 candidate for the LL.M. degree in Taxation at NYU Graduate School of Law. His wife, Joy, gave birth to their first child, Peter Scott, on December 9, 1969.

Richard J. Grace, of the Bing-hamton, N. Y. law firm of Willsey, Meagher, Hummer, Madigan and Buckley, and his wife announce the birth of their third daughter, Cris-tin JoAnn, on October 9, 1969.

William P. Gilroy, of the Asbury Park, N. J. law firm of Campbell, Mangini, Foley, Lee and Murphy, married Miss Winifred Conorey of Trenton, New Jersey on August 2, 1969.

1969 James H. Freis is clerking for

the Hon. Theodore J. Labrecque, Judge of the Appellate Division of the Superior Court of New Jersey. His wife is expecting the birth of their first child.

Edward G. Fitzgerald, Jr. is clerk to Judge Alfred L. Luongo of the Federal District Court of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. He and his wife announce the birth of their son, Edward George, III, on August 15, 1969.

Louis Niedelman has recently changed law firms from Miller, Brone, Valore and McAllister of Atlantic City, New Jersey to the firm of Arkus and Cooper of the same city.

Continued from P. 1, Col. 2 particular segment of our society. All of the programs presently ad­ministered seem to be aimed at in­forming and educating the poor people of our country. The ques­tion is whether there is a sound basis for this direction and discrim­ination.

Lastly, the participants will di­rect themselves to a discussion of program implementation. In addi­tion to the Department of Health, Education and Welfare, there are many diverse private organizations and institutions which have in­volved themselves with the study of population trends and the dissemi­nation of educational materials. The initial question is whether this is an area in which programs can only be administered through either the public or private sector, but not both. If public control is either the only method of feasible administra­tion or one of the methods of feasi­ble administration, the question then arises as to which arm of government should direct the ef­forts. Exemplary of the choices available are, of course, federal government, state government, and local government. Finally, regard­less of the sector which controls the implementation of any pro­gram, the question arises as to whether the organization may properly advocate specific methods of birth control or whether it must restrict its activities to the distri­bution of educational materials only.

It was in the early 60's that the United States actually recognized the problems imposed by its ever increasing population. The late 60's has seen the federal govern­ment take rather insignificant and timid action. Absent a cataclysmic event, even conservative estimates indicate that by the year 2000 the inhabitants of the United States will multiply into a rupturing populace. The competence of the panelists to discuss problems raised by any attempt to alleviate over­population promises to make this Symposium an important and in­teresting one to both law students and members of the bar.