Welfare chief defends three-year protection order for home-birth baby, citing neglect and lack of parental proof

The Secretary for Labour and Welfare has detailed the rationale behind a court's decision to place a home-birth infant under a three-year protection order, revealing that authorities unanimously classified the case as child neglect after facing severe difficulties in communicating with the parents and verifying their ability to provide care.

Speaking on a radio program, welfare chief Chris Sun Yuk-han provided public updates regarding the infant, known as Danny, whose parents were previously arrested for refusing to submit the child's DNA data to immigration officials. 

Sun confirmed that the baby is currently hospitalized for observation due to a minor fever but remains in stable condition. He noted that once the infant is fully recovered, he will be transferred to a Social Welfare Department care facility.

Elaborating on the government's intervention, Sun explained that his department followed strict, established protocols before approaching the court. 

Prior to applying for the 36-month protection order, authorities convened a multi-disciplinary panel of experts. 

This team unanimously determined that the situation constituted child neglect, which is legally recognized as a form of child abuse. 

Driven by the need to protect the child's best interests, the department recommended the legal mandate, which the court subsequently granted based on these professional evaluations.

Addressing reporters after the broadcast, the welfare secretary shed light on the specific hurdles officials faced when dealing with the parents, Tsang and Kwan. Sun disclosed that authorities struggled significantly to maintain contact with the couple, who failed to provide reliable communication methods. 

Furthermore, he noted that the parents were unable to present any concrete, tangible evidence to demonstrate they could properly care for the child, relying entirely on verbal promises that the department found insufficient. 

Despite the lengthy court mandate, Sun assured the public that the three-year duration is not absolute. 

He indicated that the government is open to petitioning the court to shorten the protection order if the family demonstrates significant and positive improvements in the future. 

However, he stressed that any such adjustments would depend entirely on continuous professional assessments and the absolute well-being of the child. 

Under the current arrangement, the parents are permitted weekly visits to the shelter, a policy that will be kept under periodic review.

Concluding his remarks, Sun acknowledged the fundamental principle that children are ideally raised by their own parents. 

He emphasized that the government does not seek protection orders lightly, but maintained that the court's intervention in this case was a necessary measure aimed solely at securing the best possible environment for the infant's healthy development.

𝗗𝗼𝘄𝗻𝗹𝗼𝗮𝗱 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗦𝘁𝗮𝗻𝗱𝗮𝗿𝗱 𝗔𝗽𝗽 ↓