doi.org/10.1017/S1035077200001127
Article type: Original Research
1 January 2010
Volume 35 Issue 3
doi.org/10.1017/S1035077200001127
Article type: Original Research
1 January 2010
Volume 35 Issue 3
Confidentiality in child protection cases Who benefits?
Affiliations
1 James Cook University, frankainsworth@hotmail.com
2 Australian Catholic University
Contributions
Frank Ainsworth -
Patricia Hansen -
Frank Ainsworth1
Patricia Hansen2
Affiliations
1 James Cook University, frankainsworth@hotmail.com
2 Australian Catholic University
CITATION: Ainsworth F., & Hansen P. (2010). Confidentiality in child protection cases Who benefits? Children Australia, 35(3), 1759. doi.org/10.1017/S1035077200001127
Abstract
Child protection legislation in every Australian state and territory prohibits the disclosure of the identity of a person who acts as a mandatory reporter. There is also provision in most child protection legislation that prevents the naming of children and families in protection cases. It is argued that disclosure is not in the interests of the child, the family or the general public. Children's Court proceedings in most states and territories in Australia are closed to the public so that, unlike in most other jurisdictions, interested parties are not able to observe the proceedings. Child protection authorities also have considerable power to collect information about children and families from many sources. This power to obtain information is compounded by legislation which removes confidentiality provisions from professional codes of ethics. Furthermore, the rules of evidence do not ordinarily apply in the Children's Court. This article uses New South Wales as the exemplar state and raises questions about all of these issues.