Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-5nwft Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-06T03:47:02.030Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Proposals for Legislative Changes in Relation to Neglected Children and Child Offenders in Tasmania

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 February 2024

LL. M. Kate Warner
LL. M. Kate Warner*
Affiliation:
The University of Tasmania
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

All the Australian states are either in the process of or have completed reviews of their child welfare legislation. The Australian Law Reform Commission has also completed its report on the reform of the child welfare laws. In Tasmania the Report of the Committee of Review into the Child Welfare Act 1960 and Social Welfare Services (the Roe Report) was tabled in December 1980. The following comments are directed to the two parts of the report dealing with children in need of care and children’s courts and young offenders. A draft bill is in the process of preparation incorporating the substance of these proposals.

Those who looked forward to proposals which seek to meet the criticisms of the welfare approach to juvenile offenders and the assimilation of offenders and deprived children have been disappointed. The report proposes the development of a community welfare orientation by seeking to change the emphasis from remedial institutional services to preventative community based services, but it fails to deal with other fundamental criticisms of the existing system. The failure to reduce crime through the criminal justice system, the hypocrisy injustice and subjectivity of the welfare approach and the ambivalence and confusion inherent in the existing system are not adequately resolved.

Type
Research Article
Information
Children Australia , Volume 7 , Issue 1 , Autumn 1982 , pp. 10 - 15
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1982

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

1. Wald, M.S. (1979) “State Intervention on Behalf of ‘Neglected’ Children: A Search for Realistic Standards”, in Rosenheim, M.K. (ed.) Pursuing Justice for the Child, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 246–278.Google Scholar
2. Morris, A. and Isaac, M. (1978) Juvenile Justice? The Practice of Social Welfare, London: MacMillan & Co.Google Scholar
3. Chisholm, R. (1979) “When Should the State Take Over?” Legal Services Bulletin, 3, 133–138.Google Scholar
4. Farrington, D.P. (1975), “The Effects of Public Labelling”, British Journal of Criminology, 17, 112–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Armstrong, C. (1977), ‘Females Under the Law – “Protected” but Unequal. Crime and Delinquency, 23, 109–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Omodei, R. (1981), “The Mythinterpretation of Female Crime”, in Women and Crime, Mukherjee, S. and Scutt, J. (eds.) Sydney: Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
7. Lemert, E. (1981), “Diversion in Juvenile Justice: What Hath Been Wrought”, Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 34–46.Google Scholar
8. Kraus, J (1973), “The Response of Male Juvenile Offenders to Court Caution”, A.N.L.J. Crimin. 6(2), 75–82.Google Scholar
9. Appleby, M. et al., (1979) “Legal Aid for Children”, Legal Services Bulletin, 4, 195–197.Google Scholar