This is an interesting question, for the difference between a juvenile delinquent and a status offender is clearly defined by law; however, psychologically, they are as similar as they are different. In the article I've attached below from the Psychiatric Quarterly, it's clear that the actual difference between these two classes of young people is minimal. Their behaviors are similar, though the causes may be different. A juvenile delinquent breaks the law and becomes a menace (or at least a nuisance) to himself and society; a status offender is a juvenile who commits acts which would not be considered crimes if adults had committed them, such as truancy. Should one who commits a non-crime be treated the same as one who commits an actual crime? While status offenders must be dealt with (and might even benefit from the same resources available to juvenile offenders), if they don't commit a crime they should not be punished as if they did.