The marginalisation of children by the legal process

Abstract

A major study carried out in the Melbourne Children's Court, Victoria, Australia, during 1993–1995, of the factors that influence magistrates' decision-making in child abuse cases, found that magistrates relied more on their legal training and individual discretion than on information from the child protection service when making these decisions. Magistrates' emphasis on adversarial procedures meant that the need to establish the facts in a case was the court's primary consideration and that children's interests, and welfare concerns about them, were marginalised in the hearing of child abuse matters. The article reports on this aspect of the larger study: how the adversarial process ill serves the rights, and best interests, of children in the hearing of child abuse matters and provides case examples to illustrate this. The information is drawn from the qualitative and quantitative data gathered for the major study; data collected from the observation of court hearings, interviews with magistrates and court record analysis.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 15 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.