An international overview of child protection services to protect unborn children from significant harm.

IF 0.9 Q2 LAW
Annick Zijlstra, Mariëlle R Bruning, Maroesjka van Nieuwenhuijzen, Bram O de Castro
{"title":"An international overview of child protection services to protect unborn children from significant harm.","authors":"Annick Zijlstra, Mariëlle R Bruning, Maroesjka van Nieuwenhuijzen, Bram O de Castro","doi":"10.1080/09649069.2025.2530879","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This paper presents a comparative analysis of the availability of pre-birth protection orders in cases of imminent harm to the unborn child due to high-risk parenting in the Netherlands and other Western countries. Using a standardised questionnaire sent to legal experts in 14 countries, the study evaluates the legal frameworks for such orders. Findings indicate that in most countries, pre-birth protection orders are unavailable, though some offer voluntary pre-birth protection proceedings or only prenatal care and support. Pre-birth protection orders are legally available in New Zealand and Norway. However, unlike the Netherlands, these countries have specific legislation allowing such orders, and pre-birth protection orders are rarely used. The study highlights the ethical and legal challenges of mandatory protection measures, emphasising the need for a balanced approach that respects the rights of both the mother and the unborn child. Recommendations include improving the accessibility and quality of voluntary care, and if pre-birth protection orders are available, this needs an explicit legal basis since this implies an infringement of the fundamental rights of women. This research provides a comparative legal analysis, underscoring the necessity for ongoing evaluation of these measures' effectiveness and ethical implications.</p>","PeriodicalId":45633,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF SOCIAL WELFARE AND FAMILY LAW","volume":" ","pages":"1-22"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12315830/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JOURNAL OF SOCIAL WELFARE AND FAMILY LAW","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09649069.2025.2530879","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper presents a comparative analysis of the availability of pre-birth protection orders in cases of imminent harm to the unborn child due to high-risk parenting in the Netherlands and other Western countries. Using a standardised questionnaire sent to legal experts in 14 countries, the study evaluates the legal frameworks for such orders. Findings indicate that in most countries, pre-birth protection orders are unavailable, though some offer voluntary pre-birth protection proceedings or only prenatal care and support. Pre-birth protection orders are legally available in New Zealand and Norway. However, unlike the Netherlands, these countries have specific legislation allowing such orders, and pre-birth protection orders are rarely used. The study highlights the ethical and legal challenges of mandatory protection measures, emphasising the need for a balanced approach that respects the rights of both the mother and the unborn child. Recommendations include improving the accessibility and quality of voluntary care, and if pre-birth protection orders are available, this needs an explicit legal basis since this implies an infringement of the fundamental rights of women. This research provides a comparative legal analysis, underscoring the necessity for ongoing evaluation of these measures' effectiveness and ethical implications.

保护未出生儿童免受重大伤害的儿童保护服务的国际概况。
本文提出了一个比较分析,在荷兰和其他西方国家的高危养育对未出生的孩子造成迫在眉睫的伤害的情况下,产前保护令的可用性。通过向14个国家的法律专家发送标准化问卷,该研究评估了此类命令的法律框架。调查结果表明,在大多数国家,没有产前保护令,尽管有些国家提供自愿的产前保护程序或仅提供产前护理和支持。在新西兰和挪威,产前保护令是合法的。然而,与荷兰不同的是,这些国家有具体的立法允许这种命令,很少使用产前保护令。该研究强调了强制性保护措施的伦理和法律挑战,强调需要采取一种尊重母亲和未出生婴儿权利的平衡方法。建议包括改善自愿护理的可及性和质量,如果有产前保护令,则需要明确的法律依据,因为这意味着侵犯妇女的基本权利。这项研究提供了一个比较的法律分析,强调了对这些措施的有效性和伦理影响进行持续评估的必要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
13.30%
发文量
52
期刊介绍: The Journal of Social Welfare & Family Law is concerned with social and family law and policy in a UK, European and international context. The policy of the Editors and of the Editorial Board is to provide an interdisciplinary forum to which academics and professionals working in the social welfare and related fields may turn for guidance, comment and informed debate. Features: •Articles •Cases •European Section •Current Development •Ombudsman"s Section •Book Reviews
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信