Something has to change. At the end of it all, something has to give. Parents and children can’t keep going on like this. – Mikala, lived experience expert
We want to see a child protection system that puts the best interests of children at the centre, prioritises First Nations self-determination and ensures families can access support when they need it.
Our lawyers and non-legal advocates support thousands of parents and children each year. We assist them both at court and in discussions with Child Protection across Victoria. We see first-hand how the system does not adequately support families and prevent problems from getting worse.
Far too often, rather than keeping children safe, the child protection system creates instability in their lives through unsafe and changing placements. It puts them at risk of harmful contact with police and criminal justice systems. Our research shows many of our most frequent clients first came to us through involvement in child protection.
Removing a child from their family is one of the most serious interventions a government can make, with repercussions often felt across generations. It’s essential that child protection decisions have careful oversight and that every effort is made to assist families to safely care for their kids.
Latest news
Key reforms to transform child protection
First Nations-led solutions
First Nations families continue to experience immense harm at the hands of the child protection system. This is a consequence of laws and policies that have entrenched structural racism across government systems and led to significant over-representation in child protection systems.
We back the recommendations of the landmark report Yoorrook for Justice. It calls for transformational reforms to a self-determined child protection system, underpinned by a focus on human rights and cultural rights, to support First Nations families to stay together and thrive.
In the immediate term there should be:
- increased investment in the strong leadership of Aboriginal legal services and Aboriginal community-controlled organisations to ensure they are properly resourced to respond to meet the needs of First Nations families
- expansion of Marram Ngala Ganbu (the Koori Family Hearing Day) which is proven to result in better outcomes and experiences for First Nation families.
Change the law to reinstate flexible, child-focussed decision making
In 2016, the government introduced changes to Victorian child protection law, known as the ‘permanency amendments’. The goal was to decrease the amount of time children spent in out-of-home care and promote more timely decisions about children’s long-term care.
We strongly support these goals, but the permanency amendments are a blunt instrument. By creating fixed time limits on reunification and restricting decision-making options for the court, the permanency amendments do not cater for the complex needs of individual families.
A lived-experience expert working with us explains the challenges of trying to meet the timelines for reunification:
“My partner and I had a two-year time limit to work with services and that is very difficult to do when you have very little faith and trust in services, carers and the system as a whole. No two families are ever the same and I always found it extremely difficult when Child Protection and services would treat us like we should have been a ‘normal family’ when in fact our family isn’t a normal family in the words of a textbook. We are a family full of trauma (the kids included for their short lives so far). We are also a family with disabilities who need adjustments and a family that are still healing from the Stolen Generations impact and the fear of identifying as being Aboriginal and being targeted because of being indigenous and disabled family.” - Zara
In many cases, the amendments have not created stability for children. We have seen increasing numbers of children on two-year care by secretary orders, which means Child Protection makes all decisions about their care without any court or independent oversight during the order.
The law must be flexible enough to ensure that child protection decisions serve a child’s best interests at all stages.
We call for the removal of time-limits on reunification and the restrictions on Children’s Court decisions. This will ensure the court can uphold the best interests of a child and continue to provide an essential check and balance on the powers of Child Protection. Access to intensive support services must be expanded so families have every chance of reunifying safely with their children.
A state-wide specialist Children’s Court, including Marram Ngala Ganbu
In metropolitan Melbourne, child protection matters are heard by specialist Children’s Court magistrates. In regional Victoria these matters are heard in the Magistrates’ Court. The lack of specialist knowledge and dedicated Children’s Court sittings in regional areas disadvantages vulnerable children and contributes to regional inequality.
This can include delays to family reunification and children being placed in foster care unnecessarily until a matter can be heard and the children returned to parental or other family care.
The absence of specialist courts in regional areas disproportionately impacts First Nations families as they are more likely to have their matter heard in a regional court. From 2020 to 2022, First Nations clients accounted for 21 per cent of child protection legal aid files in regional courts, compared to only 11 per cent in metropolitan specialist courts.
The specialist Children’s Court must be expanded state-wide, alongside an expansion of Marram Ngala Ganbu to provide a culturally safe approach to First Nations child protection matters.
Someone on their side – expanding independent support for parents
Parents need access to independent support to navigate the child protection system, as the experience can be profoundly challenging and disempowering for many.
There is growing evidence about the value of independent advocacy in child protection. A research report from the Royal Commission into Violence, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation of People with Disability found:
‘Advocates are beneficial for parents, child protection agencies and authorities. They can assist in directing realistic, goal-directed action towards addressing identified risks. They can support parents with disability and their families to navigate supports and have their perspectives and experiences heard across child protection decision-making...’.
VLA’s non-legal advocacy service Independent Family Advocacy Support (IFAS) was designed with people with lived experience of the child protection system. Operating in five local areas, IFAS aims to support informed decision-making and engagement between families and the Department of Families, Fairness and Housing (DFFH) and avoid court proceedings where possible.
An independent evaluation of IFAS concluded that the service diverted 20 per cent of its clients from child protection court proceedings. The evaluation recommended a state-wide expansion of IFAS.
Keeping kids in care away from the criminal justice system
Residential care is meant to provide a safe and supportive environment for vulnerable children who cannot live safely with their family. These children have often experienced extensive trauma and moved between multiple care placements.
Instead, far too often our lawyers see children in residential care charged by police for incidents they would be unlikely to be charged for if living at home, such as breaking a plate or throwing household objects.
Read our recommendations to provide kids with care not custody.
More information
Read Mikala’s story, from our submission to the Yoorrook Justice Commission.
Read about our evidence to the Yoorrook Justice Commission.
Read about Five key reforms that would deliver a system that best protects children and supports families.
Read about our research into impact of the permanency amendments in our report ‘Achieving safe and certain homes for children’.
Updated