For instance, in Roper v Simmons, the case that declared the death penalty unconstitutional for crimes committed by juveniles, Justice Scalia in dissent soundly criticized the American Psychological Association (APA) for inconsistency:

We need not look far to find studies contradicting the Court's
conclusions. As petitioner points out, the American Psychological
Association (APA), which claims in this case that scientific evidence
shows persons under 18 lack the ability to take moral responsibility
for their decisions, has previously taken precisely the opposite
position before this very Court.  In its brief n Hodgson v Minnesota,
497 U.S. 417 (1990), the APA found a "rich body of research"
showing that juveniles are mature enough to decide whether
to obtain an abortion without parental involvement.

Brief for APA as Amicus Curiae, O.T. 1989, No. 88805 etc., p. 18.
The APA brief, citing psychology treatises and studies too numerous
to list here, asserted: "[B]y middle adolescence (age 14-15) young
people develop abilities similar to adults in reasoning about moral
dilemmas, understanding social rules and laws, [and] reasoning about interpersonal relationships and interpersonal problems." Id., at 1920
(citations omitted).  Given the nuances of scientific methodology
and conflicting views, courts which can only consider the limited
evidence on the record before them are ill equipped to determine
which view of science is the right one.

Is there a scientific foundation based on the best child development research to guide the law in drawing these lines? Is a general theory available that would guide law makers to treat children and youth consistently when it comes to granting rights, expecting them to have a voice, holding them accountable for actions? Perhaps a harmonious theory of child development for law and lawyers is not appropriate and the law should presume more capacity and autonomy when granting rights and less capacity when applying punishment?

This topic is at the top of the national child welfare agenda. The National Council of Commissioners for Uniform State Laws (recently renamed the Uniform Law Commission) is making recommendations for a model act on the topic. The American Bar Association (ABA) Litigation Section has developed its own model act for representation of children to be considered by the ABA General Assembly. The ABA Family Law Section convened a joint meeting with the APA in Chicago in May 2008 on the question of a child capacity to give meaningful input to the court on questions of their custody. These issues will not be resolved any time soon. Our unique position within a university, drawing broadly on other disciplines, will allow us to take this on, analyze the problems carefully, and develop some unique policy recommendations.