Legal systems have major impacts on the lives of individuals, especially juveniles. However, there are many barriers put in place that prevent youth from having autonomy in legal settings, court systems, and juvenile justice processes. These legal systems are often made with the adults making 100% of the decisions, while the minors have little to no authority over how they are directly affected by these proceedings. Judges, attorneys, and people in positions of legal power are less likely to take minors seriously, and more likely to deem that minors do not know what is in their best interest, even in situations where the young person in question is clearly competent. Along with this, minors lack several important legal rights, which hinders their autonomy, such as trial by jury, ability to enter contracts, ability to sue, and the ability to independently hire legal counsel.
Most of the legal rights of minors’ end up being controlled by their parents, which can create major issues in situations of parental oppression, where parents are abusive, untrustworthy, or simply do not have the best interests of the minor at heart. In order to better advocate for themselves, and gain autonomy over important decisions in their lives, minors need to have their legal rights in their own hands, and have a say in the court proceedings that directly impact them.
In the following webpage, the National Youth Rights Association explains flaws in how certain legal systems treat youth, lack of youth autonomy in various court proceedings, and fundamental legal rights that youth are not allowed to have.
Table of Contents
- Juvenile Justice
- Status Offenses
- Right to Jury Trial
- Emancipation
- Agency in Custody Battles
- Ability to Enter Contracts
- Ability to Waive Privacy Rights
- Orders of Protection
- Property Rights
- Testifying and Participation Rights in Court
- Right to Public Proceedings
- Ability to Independently Hire Legal Counsel
- Ability to Sue
- Right to Refuse Court Ordered Treatment
The National Youth Rights Association
If you’re interested in Youth Rights, consider volunteering with us. We are always looking for new members and would love to have you on board. If you have a personal story to share, of how lack of legal autonomy negatively affected your life, or about a general youth rights violation, consider sending us an email at nyra@youthrights.org. We’d love to help get your story out to the world.
Juvenile Justice
Young people experience major discrimination within the juvenile justice system, often being denied rights and protections that are guaranteed to adults in criminal court. In many states, juveniles do not have the right to a jury trial, meaning that a judge alone decides whether they are guilty or innocent. Interrogations of minors can be especially coercive, as young people are more vulnerable to intimidation from police officers and authority figures, yet many states still allow juveniles to be questioned without an attorney present. Juvenile court proceedings are often justified as being “rehabilitative” instead of punitive, but in practice, juveniles can still face incarceration, surveillance, probation restrictions, and life-altering consequences while lacking many of the procedural protections adults receive.
Along with this, juvenile courts often operate with broad judicial discretion, allowing judges to impose punishments or restrictions based on vague standards such as what is considered to be in the “best interests” of the child, rather than clear legal principles. Young people deserve equal constitutional protections, full due process rights, and the same legal safeguards that adults are guaranteed in criminal proceedings.
Abuses in Juvenile Detention Centers
Abuse within juvenile detention facilities is another major issue within the juvenile justice system. Juveniles held in detention centers often report physical abuse, excessive force, humiliation, neglect, denial of medical care, and unsafe living conditions. Solitary confinement is especially controversial, as many detained juveniles are isolated alone for long periods of time as punishment or for “protective custody.” Extended isolation can severely damage a young person’s mental health, contributing to depression, anxiety, self-harm, and suicide. Despite these dangers, solitary confinement has historically been used in juvenile facilities across the United States.
Many detention centers also fail to provide adequate educational opportunities, therapy, or rehabilitation services, even though the juvenile justice system claims rehabilitation is its primary purpose. Young people in detention are often defaultly treated as though they are dangerous, leading to harsh punishments and dehumanizing treatment that can permanently harm their development and future opportunities.
Status Offenses
All states have “status offenses”, or specific statutes that only apply to minors because of their age. Oftentimes, these offenses are extremely vague, and target minors in vulnerable situations, forcing juvenile court intervention into their lives which ends up harming them worse. For example, many states have status offenses on “disturbing school” which is very vague, can be charged in minor circumstances, and increases policing and punishment within schools. A student simply wanting to use the bathroom more than they’re allowed, questioning an authoritarian teacher, or talking too much during class could technically be considered distributing school under some vague renditions of this offense. Other Status offenses often include disobeying parental authority, which—while also being vague—espcially negatively affects young people who are living in homes with abusive and oppressive parental figures who do not have their best interests at heart.
Running away is another status offense that is extremely harmful for juveniles. When a minor runs away, most states use a status offense system for runaway cases that gives police officers legal authority to take minors into custody, and reunify them with their parents. This can make it extremely difficult for juveniles to escape oppressive or abusive home environments, especially when child protective services have failed to intervene to remove them from the home. Truancy as a status offense creates criminal penalties for students and families who may have extraordinary life circumstances that hinders the minor’s ability to attend school. These various status offenses have negative consequences on minors’ lives, and force unnecessary intervention and control by law enforcement and court systems. Minors deserve freedom from discriminatory statutes that are vague, and affect them unfairly.
Right to Jury Trial
Despite a trial by jury being a constitutionally protected right under 7th amendment, minors are not given the right to a jury trial in juvenile justice proceedings unconditionally. Because Juvenile justice proceedings are usually not considered real criminal proceedings, and are instead labeled as civil matters, minors are not given the right to a jury trial in most states. Few states allow minors to have access to jury trials, while others only allow it under certain conditions, such as the crime being extremely serious. However, in most states, the only way juveniles have access to a trial by jury is if they are moved into adult court for their trial. Juveniles usually have to rely on just a judge’s ruling, instead of a jury by their peers, which is an inherently unfair way of conducting the juvenile justice system, due to the lasting consequences that criminal charges—even while young—can have on minors.
The denial of jury trials in juvenile court is often justified by claiming that the juvenile system is meant to be “rehabilitative” rather than punitive. In reality, juveniles can still lose their freedom, be incarcerated, placed under surveillance, and receive records that negatively impact their futures. Despite these serious consequences, young people are denied one of the most important procedural protections available in the American justice system. Young people deserve the same right to a jury of their peers that adults receive when facing accusations that could take away their liberty.
Emancipation
Young people who are trapped in abusive, neglectful, or oppressive home environments often face enormous barriers when attempting to become legally independent through emancipation. In many states, there is no clear or straightforward legal process allowing a minor to independently petition for emancipation. Some states do not even have formal emancipation statutes at all, leaving courts to handle cases inconsistently or requiring minors to fit into narrow categories such as marriage, military service, or financial self-sufficiency. Even in states that do allow emancipation petitions, the process is often extremely difficult because minors are expected to already prove financial independence, stable housing, and adult-level responsibility before being granted independence. This creates a paradox where a young person may need the independence given by emancipation in order to legally obtain housing, employment stability, or autonomy, but cannot qualify for emancipation without already having those things.
The emancipation process is also heavily influenced by adults, leaving minors with limited control over their own cases. Many juveniles cannot realistically afford attorneys, and—due to their lack of legal autonomy—are often forced to rely on the same parents they are attempting to escape in order to access transportation, documentation, or financial resources necessary for court proceedings. Courts may also prioritize parental authority over the wishes and wellbeing of the young person, even in situations where the juvenile alleges emotional abuse, excessive control, or manipulation that does not technically meet narrow legal definitions of child abuse. Because of this, many young people remain legally trapped in harmful living situations with little practical pathway toward independence. Young people deserve a clearer, more accessible emancipation process that allows them to independently seek freedom from harmful environments and exercise greater control over their own lives.
Agency in Custody Battles
Young people often have very limited autonomy in custody battles, despite being the individuals most directly affected by the outcome of the proceedings. In many custody disputes, juveniles do not have the ability to formally choose which parent they wish to live with, even when they are older teenagers capable of expressing clear and rational preferences. While some states allow judges to consider the wishes of the child, courts are generally not required to follow those wishes, and judges retain broad discretion to override the juvenile’s preferences based on what the court believes is in the child’s “best interests.” This can leave young people feeling powerless and unheard, especially in situations where they are attempting to avoid a controlling, neglectful, or emotionally harmful parent.
Juveniles also frequently lack meaningful participation rights during custody proceedings themselves. Many children are not allowed to directly testify in open court, either because judges believe it may emotionally harm them or because courts prefer to rely on guardians ad litem, psychologists, or other adult representatives to speak on their behalf. This means that adults often control the narrative surrounding the child’s own experiences, emotions, and wishes. Some court orders during custody disputes specifically include provisions that make it so the parents aren’t even allowed to discuss the details of the child’s own custody battle with them, in order to prevent “parental alienation”. Along with this, juveniles may have little control over visitation schedules, relocation decisions, schooling arrangements, religious upbringing, or medical decisions that result from custody rulings. Even older teenagers nearing adulthood can find themselves legally compelled into custody arrangements that they strongly oppose. Young people deserve greater legal recognition of their autonomy, especially in custody disputes where their daily lives, safety, and wellbeing are directly impacted by court decisions.
Ability to Enter Contracts
Young people face major restrictions when it comes to entering legally binding contracts. In most situations, minors cannot independently sign enforceable agreements for housing, loans, employment arrangements, financial services, or many other important aspects of daily life. Contracts signed by minors are often considered “voidable,” meaning the juvenile can later cancel the agreement, which causes many businesses and landlords to refuse to contract with minors at all. As a result, young people frequently depend on parents or other adults to co-sign agreements, even in situations where the juvenile is financially capable or attempting to live independently. Lack of ability to enter contracts is the main reason for multiple forms of business discrimination against minors, such as banks refusing to allow them independent checking accounts, hotels refusing to let them book rooms, and ridesharing apps not letting them use the app independently.
These restrictions can create serious barriers for young people attempting to escape abusive households, pursue independent careers, or manage their own finances. Minors may struggle to rent apartments, open utility accounts, obtain insurance, access transportation services, or independently engage in professional opportunities because companies fear the contract may not be enforceable. Young entrepreneurs, artists, content creators, and performers are also often forced to surrender legal and financial control to parents or guardians because they cannot independently negotiate contracts. Even when minors are earning significant amounts of money through work or entertainment, adults usually maintain legal authority over the agreements involved. Young people deserve greater flexibility and legal recognition in contractual relationships, especially in circumstances where they demonstrate competence and independence.
Ability to Waive Privacy Rights
Young people often lack the ability to independently waive or control their own privacy rights, with parents or guardians typically holding the legal authority to make those decisions on their behalf. This can create situations where juveniles are denied control over how their image, identity, medical information, educational records, or personal experiences are shared publicly. For example, minors generally cannot independently consent to media appearances, publication agreements, or releases involving their likeness without parental approval. This can prevent young people from participating in interviews, advocacy campaigns, documentaries, or creative projects that they personally wish to be involved in if their parents refuse consent. This forces young people to be trapped and unable to speak out against many forms of parental oppression. Imagine a minor does an interview with an advocacy organization about the abusive treatment they face at home, by their parents. The organization cannot publish the story without risking legal repercussions, unless they have the parent’s consent—which they obviously would not give. This literally means juveniles need parental consent to speak out publicly about their parents and home environment, which is outrageous.
At the same time, parents often possess broad authority to waive privacy protections for their children even against the child’s wishes. Parents may publicly post sensitive information about their children online, expose their medical or educational history, involve them in monetized social media content, or consent to the release of private records without meaningful input from the juvenile. Young people frequently have little legal recourse to stop parents from sharing deeply personal aspects of their lives. This imbalance leaves minors in a position where they lack both the freedom to independently share information about themselves and the power to prevent adults from exposing their privacy. Young people deserve greater control over their own personal information, public identity, and privacy rights.
Orders of Protection
Young people often face significant barriers when attempting to obtain orders of protection or restraining orders independently from their parents. In many jurisdictions, minors cannot easily file for protective orders on their own without involving a parent, guardian, or other adult representative. This creates serious problems in situations where the source of the abuse, harassment, or threat may actually involve a parent, family member, or someone connected to the household. A juvenile attempting to seek protection may be forced to rely on the very adults they are trying to escape in order to navigate the legal system.
Even in states where minors technically have the ability to petition for protection orders, the process can be intimidating and inaccessible. Young people may lack transportation, financial resources, legal knowledge, or access to attorneys who can assist them. Courts may also be reluctant to take juveniles seriously, especially in cases involving emotional abuse, stalking, dating violence, online harassment, or conflicts involving adults. Fear of retaliation from parents or guardians can further discourage minors from seeking legal protection. As a result, many juveniles remain trapped in unsafe situations without meaningful access to independent legal remedies. Young people deserve clearer legal pathways to seek protective orders confidentially and independently when necessary for their safety.
Property Rights
Young people often have extremely limited control over their own property, even when they legally acquired it themselves through work, gifts, or personal earnings. In many situations, parents or guardians maintain broad authority over a minor’s possessions, finances, and assets simply because of the juvenile’s age. This means that parents may confiscate phones, computers, money, vehicles, or other personal belongings with little legal accountability. Even when a young person purchased an item using their own earnings, they may have limited practical ability to assert ownership rights against their parents.
Juveniles also face restrictions regarding larger forms of property ownership and financial control. Minors generally cannot independently own real estate in practical terms, manage investment accounts without custodians, or fully control bank accounts and trust funds. In cases involving child actors, influencers, athletes, or young entrepreneurs, this empowers parents to be able to financially exploit their children, by managing large sums of money earned by the child while the juvenile has little oversight or legal authority regarding how those funds are used. Young people may also struggle to recover stolen property or financial assets from parents because courts often defer heavily to parental authority over minors. These limitations leave juveniles vulnerable to exploitation, financial abuse, and loss of autonomy. Young people deserve stronger legal protections for property that they earn, create, or legally possess themselves.
Testifying and Participation Rights in Court
Young people are often denied meaningful participation rights in court proceedings that directly affect their lives. Whether in family court, dependency proceedings, foster care hearings, or juvenile cases, minors frequently have limited opportunities to directly address the court, explain their experiences, or advocate for their own wishes. Adults such as parents, attorneys, social workers, guardians ad litem, and judges often speak on behalf of juveniles instead of allowing the young people themselves to meaningfully participate. Attorneys such as Amicus attorneys and Guardian ad litem attorneys are often put in place to better represent the interests of the child. However, they may not always listen and express the child’s direct wishes to the courts.
Courts may assume that juveniles are too immature to reliably express their preferences, even when older teenagers are fully capable of articulating clear opinions about their own lives and wellbeing. Young people deserve stronger participation rights in court, including the ability to testify, express preferences, and have their perspectives genuinely considered in decisions that shape their futures.
Right to Public Proceedings
Juvenile court proceedings are often closed to the public, with judges having broad authority to restrict access to hearings and records. While this is frequently presented as a privacy protection for minors, it also creates a system with far less transparency and accountability than adult courts. Because juvenile proceedings are hidden from public scrutiny, abuses of power, unfair treatment, coercive practices, and inconsistent rulings can occur with less oversight from the media, advocacy organizations, or the general public.
Young people themselves also frequently have little control over whether their proceedings remain confidential or become public. In some situations, juveniles may actually want public attention on their case in order to expose mistreatment or defend themselves against false accusations, but they may not have the authority to waive confidentiality protections on their own. The secrecy of juvenile courts can therefore sometimes function less as a protection for minors and more as a shield for the system itself. Young people deserve both meaningful privacy protections and greater transparency and accountability within the juvenile justice system.
Ability to Independently Hire Legal Counsel
Juveniles often have limited ability to independently retain or direct legal counsel, especially in family law, dependency, educational, or juvenile court proceedings. Because minors generally cannot independently enter contracts or control finances, they may be unable to hire an attorney without parental involvement. This creates serious problems in situations where the juvenile’s interests directly conflict with those of their parents or guardians.
Even when juveniles are appointed attorneys, young people frequently have limited control over legal strategy or decision-making. Attorneys, guardians ad litem, parents, and judges may prioritize what they believe is in the juvenile’s “best interests” rather than following the young person’s actual wishes. This differs significantly from adult legal proceedings, where attorneys are generally expected to follow the client’s instructions and objectives. Young people deserve greater autonomy in directing their own legal representation, especially in cases where the proceedings will dramatically affect their lives, safety, or future independence.
Ability to Sue
Young people face major limitations when attempting to independently access the civil court system. In most states, minors generally cannot file lawsuits entirely on their own and instead must rely on a parent, guardian, or court-appointed representative to sue on their behalf. This creates serious problems in situations where the juvenile’s interests conflict with those of their parents or guardians, especially in cases involving abuse, neglect, financial exploitation, privacy violations, medical disputes, or harm caused by the parents themselves. A young person may have a legitimate legal grievance, but no practical ability to bring the case because the adults who would normally control the lawsuit are the same individuals responsible for the harm.
Even when minors are technically allowed to participate in lawsuits through a “next friend” or guardian ad litem, young people frequently have limited control over the direction of the case, settlement negotiations, or legal strategy. Adults and courts often make decisions based on what they believe is in the juvenile’s “best interests,” rather than following the young person’s actual wishes. Courts may also restrict a juvenile’s ability to testify, speak publicly about the case, or independently communicate with attorneys. Because of these barriers, young people can struggle to seek accountability for violations of their rights, property, safety, or wellbeing. Young people deserve greater independent access to the civil justice system and stronger legal pathways to bring lawsuits when their rights have been violated.
Right to Refuse Court Ordered Treatment
Juveniles often have limited ability to refuse court ordered counseling, psychiatric treatment, medication, behavioral programs, or residential placements. Courts may order young people into treatment programs under the justification of rehabilitation or acting in the juvenile’s “best interests,” even when the young person strongly opposes the treatment being imposed. In some situations, juveniles may be compelled to take psychiatric medication, participate in invasive therapy programs, or attend residential behavioral facilities against their will.
Adults generally possess much stronger rights to challenge forced treatment and bodily intrusion. Juveniles, however, are often viewed as lacking the autonomy necessary to make informed decisions regarding their own mental health or medical care. This creates opportunities for abuse, overmedication, coercive treatment practices, and placement into programs that may be emotionally or physically harmful. Young people deserve stronger bodily autonomy rights and greater legal protections against unwanted court ordered treatment.
Read more about Making Decisions about Treatment
