Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-01T04:57:07.199Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The ‘best interests of the child’ Historical perspectives

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 February 2016

Nell Musgrove  and
Shurlee Swain
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In the middle of the nineteenth century, Australian responses to children in need were significantly influenced by the belief that such children posed a threat to society. At the beginning of the twenty-first century, child welfare legislation states that ‘the best interests of the child must always be paramount’ (Children, Youth and Families Act 2005, Victoria). This paper surveys some of the local and overseas influences which directed child welfare practice and policy towards a philosophy in which the wellbeing of the child is central. It suggests that the concept of the child's personal welfare influenced the understandings of welfare officials long before the term ‘best interests’ was widely employed, but also that this transition in thought did not necessarily correlate with marked improvements in the outcomes for children within the welfare system.

Type
Research Article
Information
Children Australia , Volume 35 , Issue 2: SPECIAL ISSUE: Adoption, fostering, permanent care and beyond: Re-thinking policy and practice on out-of-home care for children in Australia , 2010 , pp. 35 - 37
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Argus (1859) Untitled, 5 December, 4.Google Scholar
Barnardo, T.J. (1889) ‘The Roman Catholics and my children’, Night and Day, 13, 137–8.Google Scholar
Hobart Town Daily Mercury (1859) ‘Supreme Court: Sittings in Banco’, 2 December, 2.Google Scholar
Jaggs, Donella (1986) Neglected and criminal: foundations of child welfare legislation in Victoria, Melbourne: Phillip Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
Mercury (1901) Supreme Court: Full Court, 20 July, 4.Google Scholar
Musgrove, Nell (2003) ‘Making better families’: Surveillance, evaluation and control of families in Melbourne, 1945-1965. MA Thesis, History, University of Melbourne.Google Scholar
Musgrove, Nell (2009) ‘The scars remain’: Children, their families and institutional ‘care’ in Victoria 1864-1954, PhD, School of Historical Studies, University of Melbourne, Melbourne.Google Scholar
Paulus, (1875) ‘Judicial Disagreements’, Sydney Morning Herald, 11 January, 3.Google Scholar
Senate Community Affairs References Committee (2004) Forgotten Australians: A report on Australians who experienced institutional or out-of-home care as children, Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia.Google Scholar
Spectator and Methodist Chronicle (1882) ‘The Children's Home, London’, 23 June, 92.Google Scholar
St John's Home For Boys (1954) Swinging into his future at the St John's Home for Boys: Souvenir History Book, South Melbourne: Andersons Printing & Publishing Co. Pty. Ltd.Google Scholar
Stafford, Laura (2005) Maintaining long-distance and cross-residential relationships, Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.Google Scholar
Sydney Morning Herald (1861) ‘Supreme Court: Sittings in Banco’, 23 October, 2.Google Scholar
Wright, Danaya C. (1999) ‘De Manneville v. De Manneville: Rethinking the birth of custody law under patriarchy’, Law and History Review, 17 (Summer), 247–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar