将家庭纳入儿童保护:法律、法院和平衡风险

IF 0.7 Q2 LAW Alternative Law Journal Pub Date : 2024-08-26 DOI:10.1177/1037969x241267701
Nicola Ross, Wendy Foote, Kate Davies
{"title":"将家庭纳入儿童保护:法律、法院和平衡风险","authors":"Nicola Ross, Wendy Foote, Kate Davies","doi":"10.1177/1037969x241267701","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Australian child protection systems are being challenged to find more effective ways of responding to the needs of children and families. This article describes legal processes that govern children’s removal from their families and queries whether we are doing enough to prioritise children’s relationships with their families. The court’s capacity to review the decisions of state welfare authorities and evaluate risks of children being removed is considered with reference to research with stakeholders and a recent case in the NSW Children’s Court. The authors argue that reforms which emphasise family inclusion and address power differentials could provide better outcomes for children.","PeriodicalId":44595,"journal":{"name":"Alternative Law Journal","volume":"30 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Family inclusion in child protection: Law, courts and balancing risks\",\"authors\":\"Nicola Ross, Wendy Foote, Kate Davies\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/1037969x241267701\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Australian child protection systems are being challenged to find more effective ways of responding to the needs of children and families. This article describes legal processes that govern children’s removal from their families and queries whether we are doing enough to prioritise children’s relationships with their families. The court’s capacity to review the decisions of state welfare authorities and evaluate risks of children being removed is considered with reference to research with stakeholders and a recent case in the NSW Children’s Court. The authors argue that reforms which emphasise family inclusion and address power differentials could provide better outcomes for children.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44595,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Alternative Law Journal\",\"volume\":\"30 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Alternative Law Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/1037969x241267701\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Alternative Law Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1037969x241267701","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

澳大利亚的儿童保护体系正面临着挑战,需要找到更有效的方法来满足儿童和家庭的需求。本文介绍了将儿童从其家庭中带走的法律程序,并质疑我们在优先考虑儿童与其家庭的关系方面是否做得足够。文章参考了对利益相关者的研究和新南威尔士州儿童法院最近的一个案例,对法院审查州福利机构的决定和评估儿童被带走风险的能力进行了探讨。作者认为,强调家庭包容和解决权力差异的改革可以为儿童提供更好的结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Family inclusion in child protection: Law, courts and balancing risks
Australian child protection systems are being challenged to find more effective ways of responding to the needs of children and families. This article describes legal processes that govern children’s removal from their families and queries whether we are doing enough to prioritise children’s relationships with their families. The court’s capacity to review the decisions of state welfare authorities and evaluate risks of children being removed is considered with reference to research with stakeholders and a recent case in the NSW Children’s Court. The authors argue that reforms which emphasise family inclusion and address power differentials could provide better outcomes for children.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
58
期刊最新文献
Coming, ready or not Beyond the Preamble: Legislating the right to self-determination in a NSW Human Rights Act Family inclusion in child protection: Law, courts and balancing risks Returning to rebellious roots: What rebellious lawyering can offer progressive law in Australia Forks in the road to equality: The path for same-sex attracted individuals in Australia and Nigeria
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1