Citation

Barth RP. Int. J. Soc. Welf. 2009; 18(4): 440-442.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2009, John Wiley and Sons)

DOI

10.1111/j.1468-2397.2009.00694.x

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

Many of the concerns about recent changes in child welfare services practice in Australia have also been raised in the USA. Although it certainly may be the case that mandatory reporting is causing a broadening of child welfare services in Australia, close data‐informed scrutiny suggests that this is not the case in the USA. Further, there are positive alternatives to overly intrusive child welfare service interventions that are arising in the USA. There is reasonable evidence to suggest that too little protection rather than too much intrusion remains the more significant problem in the USA; this may also be true elsewhere. The quality and range of services certainly determines whether intrusion is helpful to children and families. In some cases, for example life‐threatening health problems that parents will not or cannot treat, engaging the assistance of child welfare services should not be ruled out for ideological reasons.