United States Social reformers in America during the late 19th and early 20th centuries almost invariably found fault with the then-usual practice of treating
juvenile offenders essentially the same as
adult criminals. It was recognized that the juveniles were often sexually and/or otherwise exploited by the older inmates, and that they were often receiving instruction in more advanced and serious ways of crime by hardened criminals. As a result, rather than their sentences serving as a deterrent to future crimes, many juvenile offenders emerged from incarceration far worse than when they were first sentenced. The reforms, which were adopted more readily in some states than others, consisted of a two-pronged approach – a separate
juvenile code and
juvenile courts for offenders who had not reached the
age of majority, and the building of separate institutions for juvenile "delinquents" (the
stigmatizing term "criminal" not being used). Since the primary purpose of these institutions was to be
rehabilitative rather than
punitive, they were styled "reform schools". For the most part, these institutions were custodial.
United Kingdom In the United Kingdom,
reformatory schools were provided for criminal children, whilst
industrial schools were intended to prevent vulnerable children from becoming criminals. There was a perceived rise in juvenile delinquency during the early 19th century; whereas in a rural economy young children could gain paid employment doing tasks such as bird scaring and stone gathering, these opportunities were not available in the cities. Children were very visible on the streets. In 1816, Parliament set up a ‘Committee for Investigating the Alarming Increase in Juvenile Crime in the Metropolis’; in 1837, the writer Charles Dickens published
Oliver Twist, a story about a child involved in a street gang; and it was recognised in the
Juvenile Offences Act 1846 that children under 14 should be tried in a special court, not an adult court. Begging and vagrancy were rife, and it was these low-level misdemeanours that caused the magistrates to send children to industrial schools to learn to be industrious, and learn skills that would make then more employable. More serious crimes required an element of punishment in an environment away from older prisoners, followed by education to reform their ways. The power to set up such an establishment was given in the
Youthful Offenders Act 1854 (the Reformatory Schools Act). This provided financial assistance and support for reformatory schools as an alternative to prison. In the 1950s and 1960s, many of the same problems that had occurred with the former system of incarcerating juveniles along with adults began to be noticed in reform school — older juveniles exploiting the younger ones, sexually and otherwise, and the younger ones taking the more hardened, usually older offenders as role models and mentors. Also, the term "reform school" itself, originally intended as
destigmatizing, had developed its own stigma.
Switzerland Reform schools were part of Switzerland's institutional confinement system from the mid-19th century onwards, primarily housing adolescents aged 13 to 20. Throughout the 20th century, between 30 and 80 such gender-segregated establishments existed, operated by cantons, municipalities, and religious organizations, with the majority located in
German-speaking Switzerland. These institutions had both punitive and corrective functions and offered vocational training, distinguishing them from children's homes and forced labor establishments. Young men were trained in agriculture, crafts, and later metalworking, while young women received training in domestic economy, needlework, and laundry work. Until the early 1970s, institutionalized young women were forced to work for Swiss manufacturing companies in factories within the homes. Daily life was strictly structured with harsh disciplinary systems including head shaving, food deprivation, and solitary confinement for rule violations. The isolation of these closed institutions facilitated psychological, physical, and sexual violence by staff and other residents, while the lack of trust in external authorities deterred victims from reporting abuse. Family contacts were heavily regulated and often restricted as punishment. The institutions' denominational character influenced their educational concepts, though after World War II, lay management became more common and standardization increased in staff training and infrastructure. The May 1968 movement and the
Heimkampagne of 1971-1972, launched by Zurich youth activists, catalyzed reforms in institutional child welfare. Critical research began in the 1970s at the
University of Zurich, and from the late 1980s, autobiographical publications by survivors stimulated historical and social science interest. Research emphasizes that traumatic experiences in reform schools marked former residents for life and sometimes caused intergenerational consequences. ==Modern view==