Children and the justice system: the Ombudsman’s Rights Agenda – removal as a last resort

Forced separations are often followed by ‘so-called coercive reunification treatments, modelled on PAS/AP (parental alienation)’, the text notes. However, ‘scientific evidence and the positions adopted by international bodies show that such interventions, as well as lacking scientific validation, can cause serious traumatic effects and constitute forms of secondary victimisation or even institutional abuse or torture’. The gradual recognition, in legislation and case law, of the principles of therapeutic self-determination, informed consent, proportionality and the protection of the child’s physical and psychological integrity “makes such practices increasingly incompatible with the constitutional and treaty-based system for the protection of fundamental rights.”

Contrary to what happens in many courts throughout Italia, the Agenda clearly states ‘the principle that the use of force against minors cannot be justified in civil proceedings relating to custody or the regulation of family relations, except in exceptional cases where it is necessary to intervene to remove the child from an immediate and real danger to their life or physical integrity’. Outside these emergency situations, the forced removal of a child from their home environment and from their primary carer ‘constitutes a measure incompatible with the constitutional principles of the protection of the individual, the right to be heard, respect for the child’s dignity and the obligations arising from international conventions’.

According to the document, forced removal ‘aimed solely at imposing unwanted parental relationships or at abstractly implementing the principle of shared parenting’ must therefore be opposed ‘firmly’. This is because “it risks transforming protective measures into independent sources of trauma and suffering. Physical or psychological coercion exerted on children in the absence of an immediate risk to their safety does not constitute a form of protection, but may amount to a serious violation of their fundamental rights”.

Following the introduction by the Deputy Speaker of the Chamber of Deputies, Giorgio Mulè (Fi), who emphasised that ‘safeguarding the rights of children and young people means laying the foundations for a freer and fairer world’, the Minister for Birth Rates, Family and Equal Opportunities, Eugenia Roccella. She expressed her appreciation to the Ombudsman for her tireless work, including on the many ‘problematic cases’ that have come to public attention. ‘Investing in children means investing in the present and the future,’ she emphasised. She recalled that the Government’s approach “is based on the central role of the family. This is not a matter of right or left,” she clarified, “but a fact: the first steps that can be taken to support children concern the family, the unit in which the child grows up”. Hence the aim: “Not to shift the family’s responsibilities elsewhere, nor to undermine its capabilities, but to seek to broaden them and strengthen parental authority.”

The Commissioner began by addressing the widespread distress reported in the media amongst children and adolescents, ranging from smartphone addiction to violent radicalisation. She reiterated her commitment to combating the improper removal of children from their families. And she criticised the treatment of children as ‘a problem, a limitation’. According to Terragni, the phenomenon of ‘mass non-motherhood’ also stems from this narrative, not merely from a lack of services and support. ‘Loneliness, isolation and a lack of connection weigh heavily – not only with one’s partner, but also with the extended family and the community, the whole “village” that used to be needed to raise a child.’

“The lack of meaningful relationships is now the main enemy of the birth rate,” said the Commissioner. She urged people not to give up and highlighted the negative effects of the pervasiveness of technology: studies such as that carried out by the University of Cincinnati have shown that areas where broadband has been introduced were the first to record significant falls in birth rates. Therefore, in addition to incentives and family policies, the Authority highlights the need to counteract the decline in the importance of relationships in favour of the individual dimension. This, it is argued, gives rise to ‘adultescence’ and the process towards the ‘neutrum economicum’ – a phenomenon which, according to Terragni, who repeatedly cites Alessandra Bocchetti, Ivan Illich, Alexander Langer and Adriana Cavarero – also stems from the erasure of values associated with sexual difference and femininity: care, first and foremost.

Terragni’s speech also includes a scathing critique of egg freezing: ‘A practice originally designed to help women with serious health problems – such as those undergoing cancer treatment – is now being promoted as a solution for healthy women. This suggests that it is society itself that is sick.’ According to Terragni, young people must be made aware once again of the central importance of relationships. And ‘we must apologise to them, explain to them that the idea of the absolute individual is a fiction’ and that independence, when treated as the ultimate aspiration, is a falsehood.

Terragni was keen to emphasise that relationships and care are the ‘foundation of human communities’. But how do we make room for relationships again? The Ombudswoman recommends ‘truly listening carefully to what women have to say about the organisation of life, work, cities and care – an inestimable value that remains marginalised in social and economic terms’. This is despite ‘the 16 billion hours provided free of charge every day, almost exclusively by women’. What is needed, then, according to the Commissioner, is ‘a care revolution’, which can be achieved in one way: ‘Cultivating a sense of gratitude towards mothers, from which much good policy can flow, for the sake of children and of us all’.