Abstract
In this article I examine the best interests of the child construct and raise questions about the utility of the construct. I also draw attention to Winnicott’s good enough parenting proposal as an alternative conceptualisation that addresses the issue of parental child-rearing capacity.The best interests construct that emanates from the US has been the dominant international child-protection paradigm for at least two decades. Associated with this construct is a focus on individual parental pathology and child-rearing deficits. Yet, family poverty is the dominant factor, rather than parental pathology or incapacity, that precipitates many child abuse and neglect cases. The question is, has the best interests construct, one that ignores poverty and social disadvantage, outlived its usefulness? This construct has certainly affected Aboriginal families and led, as evidence shows, to the over-removal of children from these families. A range of alternative interventions and a social model of child protection is then canvassed.
Highlights
Since the publication of Beyond the Best Interests of the Child (Goldstein et al, 1973) and Before the Best Interests of the Child (Goldstein et al, 1979), plus In the Best Interests of the Child (Goldstein et al, 1986) and The Best Interests of the Child
This thinking has influenced the development of clinical programmes such as Multi-Systemic Therapy, Child Abuse and Neglect (MST-child abuse and neglect (CAN))® and Family Functional Therapy, Child Welfare (FFT-CW)®, that seek to change aspects of parental behaviour
These findings suggest that strategies that reduce economic disadvantage are likely to hold significant potential to reduce the prevalence of child maltreatment
Summary
Since the publication of Beyond the Best Interests of the Child (Goldstein et al, 1973) and Before the Best Interests of the Child (Goldstein et al, 1979), plus In the Best Interests of the Child (Goldstein et al, 1986) and The Best Interests of the Child. The Least Detrimental Alternative (Goldstein et al, 1996), international child protection legislation and casework practice has been shaped by this construct. A cross-national analysis of child welfare decisions in relation to child removals supports this view (Burns et al, 2017). In 2009 and 2011, two publications (Hansen & Ainsworth, 2009, 2011) raised questions about the construct, the best interests of the child. This article again takes up this theme.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
