October 9th, 2009 by Lianne

If a child is at risk, we should act immediately and decisively; no child should be left at risk if an authority has doubt about their welfare. However, in this case, the parents were accused of child abuse towards one of their children (who had injuries deemed to be caused by the parents), and so all 3 children were removed from there care, and eventually adopted by another family.

It has now been shown, and the courts admit, that the parents were not ata fault – the injuiries were caused by an illness that the child had. Now that the courts are satisfied that the children are not at risk, they should be returned – but they won’t be. Because they are now settled with a new family.

Is this right? Should children be kept from their biological family when they are not at risk? Or is the additional upheaval too much?