The core legal principle that children and youths must be protected from violence in the home is sometimes forgotten under myriad other legal considerations, a leading family law expert says.
Otago University Professor Mark Henaghan, who chaired a child protection conference in Wellington yesterday, said the legal framework that governed
intervention in violent families was generally solid.
"The child and young persons model is strong, but, in contrast to domestic violence laws where it's important to act instantly, child protection laws can be vague and messy."
The main principle that the child must be protected was sometimes diffused, Professor Henaghan said.
"Agencies operating under the legislation can often forget that core principle. Other principles - minimum intervention, minimum interruption, family support - are required to be considered but only the core principle is mandatory.
"In one sense, we're trying to keep the family together and we don't want to intervene or disturb them, but we don't want to lose sight of what's most important.
"In cases where things have gone wrong, the child's safety has been undermined because we didn't want to be too judgmental, [thinking] 'maybe this family will come right'."
Professor Henaghan said intervention was a complex issue; while protection was always viewed as a positive step, intervention did not always end in success.
