Whenever a person does something that concerns and affects a child, this must be done in the best interests of the child. The ‘best interests of the child’ is a very important standard that we must use to measure everything that is done for a child. Sometimes it is difficult to decide what a child’s best interests are, as you often have to weigh up different issues carefully.

If a child is identified as being in need of care by the law, then the Children’s Court must hold an enquiry to decide how to protect the child.

Just because a child’s parents or caregivers are living with HIV or AIDS does not mean that the child should be placed in alternative care. It depends on the circumstances.

Case Study:

A Mother Living with HIV

In 1999, a mother living with HIV turned to the AIDS Law Project (ALP, now called SECTION27), for help. A social worker had removed the her 3 year-old twin children on the grounds that she was a bad mother because she was living with HIV and wasn’t looking after the children properly.

The ALP represented the mother in the Children’s Court and showed that she was healthy, was earning money through informal work, and that the children were well cared for.

The Department of Welfare made it clear that removing a child should be a last resort.

The case shows that when decisions are made about removing a child, discrimination and prejudice about HIV/AIDS should not be a deciding factor.