[quote PolkadotClouds]@JustLyra judges make decisions based on law and legal precedent.
Much of this thread is a discussion about whether than law and precedent (and the systems that investigate/ report/ enforce it) are a) correctly funded but also b) set up appropriately with a sensible level of safeguarding in place in balance against family privacy/ individual legal rights etc.
The argument that I and others have been making is that the bar is set too low for intervention, and the system is insufficiently funded (and not set up in the right way in terms of structure and protocols) to minimise harm to children, and provide an acceptable alternative to leaving children with negligent or abusive parents.
To change this would require change in law. Judges cannot do that, all they can do is interpret if something fits within the law as it stands. Judges are often forced to make decisions they might think wrong/ immoral because their job is not to make that judgement, but to ensure the current law is applied appropriately.
It is the law and the structure, funding and remit of social services that needs to change.[/quote]
I.e. people must lobby their MPs if they want this to be any different.
It is possible to say that this outcome was wrong at every stage (leaving the child with the mother at birth with little supervision, not removing her later when she wasn't being cared for, the sentence given to the mother being an absolute joke) without saying we know better than the judge. The judge applies the law as it stands.
The law is not sufficient to protect vulnerable children to an acceptable degree.