Book Review

In Mothers of All Children, Elizabeth Clapp turns the lens of gender analysis on the early history of juvenile courts in the United States. Following the lead of scholars such as Linda Gordon and Theda Skocpol who have argued for the importance of gender in shaping early welfare policy, Clapp looks at the emergence of the juvenile justice system as an expression of maternalism. Middle-class women reformers, accustomed to thinking of their role in society in terms of motherhood, initiated the campaign for the separate and different treatment of child offenders within the legal system during the 1890s. Seeing wayward children as innocents in need of guidance rather than punishment, they argued that it was their duty as mothers to keep child offenders from mingling with hardened adult criminals and to give them the protective guidance of a probation officer in order to keep from sliding further into criminality.	1
Female reformers like Hannah Schoff of the National Congress of Mothers, who stressed women's duty to be "mothers of all children," saw the new juvenile court system as "the great work of guarding and guiding little children" (90). Women settlement workers and women's clubs were instrumental in creating a system of probation officers who would provide benevolent guidance and nurture to children in trouble, investigating and working with the family to make sure that children were being brought up correctly. The work of the probation officer, often seen as an extension of women's motherly role, seemed especially appropriate for women, and women's clubs often paid female probation officers' salaries in the early years of the court system.	2
Fatherhood was also invoked to explain the need for juvenile courts. One of the book's most interesting chapters explores how Colorado judge Ben Lindsey tried to reform errant boys in his courtroom by instilling in them the values of traditional masculinity. Lindsey operated from the assumption that what "his boys" needed most was a substitute father figure who would encourage them to develop the manly strength of character that would keep them on the straight and narrow. Rather than the protection of innocents, Lindsey focused on the need for individual character building: "What we want to impress upon our boys is . . . that which counts most is character and manhood, and that all American boys have equal chances to become useful and respected citizens if they are faithful, industrious, and honest" (120). Boys coming into Lindsey's court were motivated to behave by a sense of pride and a desire to earn the judge's respect; for instance, when Lindsey committed a boy to the state industrial school, he left it up to the boy to get himself there and turn himself in, relying on his sense of honor (127). Clapp downplays Lindsey's overall importance in the national development of juvenile courts, noting that although he was a great publicist, his style was too idiosyncratic to be widely adopted; other states were more likely to adopt the legislation that came from the women reformers in Chicago. Ultimately Lindsey is the exception that proves the rule that the juvenile court movement was shaped by maternalism rather than paternalism.	3
Clapp does not lump all female reformers together. Like Molly Ladd-Taylor, she distinguishes between "traditional maternalists" who were motivated by a sense of maternal duty to protect innocent children, and professional reformers whose work as social investigators and professional reformers gave them a deeper understanding of the issues facing poor families in city neighborhoods. The latter group was more likely to see themselves as experts and social scientists than as mothers; although they drew upon maternalist language and emphasized womanly qualities of compassion and nurture, Clapp asserts that their maternalism was often "little more than a strategic posture" (54).	4
In Clapp's account, women were central to the creation of the juvenile court system, but they did not do it alone. Like other historians, Clapp concludes that women were more interested in using the state, seeking new legislation that would give government an activist role in protecting and guiding children, whereas male reformers were likely to try to work within existing laws. In Illinois, where the movement began, the initiative for the juvenile court came from middle-class women in the Chicago Woman's Club and at Hull House, but the bill introduced in the legislature was drafted by a male judge and known as the Chicago Bar Association Bill. Clapp describes a cooperative relationship between male and female reformers: while male reformers relied on the initiative and leadership of the women concerned with the issue of juvenile crime, the women depended on the men's legal expertise and political clout in order to get legislation approved (72). In fact, class united these male and female reformers as much as gender divided them. Male and female, professional and lay reformers found common ground in their position as middle-class people alarmed by the growing presence of urban, working-class children whose behavior and family life seemed to threaten the stability of American society. As juvenile courts became more established, however, the balance of influence shifted to male judges and lawyers and away from women reformers, who as a group remained outsiders to the legal process.	5
Mothers of All Children contributes to the growing literature on gender, reform, and welfare during the Progressive era and offers a useful revision of histories of the juvenile justice system, which have focused too much on male reformers and judges. Clapp's careful delineation of the roles played by male and female reformers is helpful in understanding how gender and professional identities shaped the reform process. Yet although Clapp's work is well grounded in the recent historical work on gender and reform, it does little to advance that literature or push it in new directions. Clapp's account of maternalism in the juvenile court movement itself is unsurprising, and much of the book is spent on background that will be familiar to many readers. More seriously, one leaves this carefully researched book without a strong argument about why gender mattered within the juvenile court movement and about the ultimate impact of its roots in maternalism.	6
Elizabeth Rose Trinity College, Hartford, Conn.

Content in the History Cooperative database is intended for personal, noncommercial use only. You may not reproduce, publish, distribute, transmit, participate in the transfer or sale of, modify, create derivative works from, display, or in any way exploit the History Cooperative database in whole or in part without the written permission of the copyright holder.