Attorneys for children have taken on a variety of roles, depending on the needs of those being represented. Mark Twain opined: "When I was a boy of 14, my father was so ignorant I could hardly stand to have the old man around. But when I got to be 21, I was astonished at how much the old man had learned in seven years." Does the mere legal incapacity of youth necessitate appointment of an attorney to represent children?

Historical Context

Children are thought to be within the custody and control of their parents, unless they choose to emancipate. Courts wish to assure that children's rights are protected in some fashion. To protect the rights of children in certain cases, judges often appoint attorneys to represent children. In 1851, in King v. Robinson, Chief Justice Ether Sheply stated that a court "is authorized to appoint a guardian ad litem, when a party becomes insane pending the suit." Akin to the concept of "parens patriae," where a government or any other authority—such as a trial judge—steps into a role of acting as a legal protector of citizens who are unable to protect themselves, our courts rely on the appointment of attorneys to represent minor children, as minor children are viewed as incompetent to represent their own rights in court. The idea is that by exercising parens patriae powers, a state attempts to take steps to assure that children are protected—even from the child's own parents.