My Story:

As a child, I was raised in a neglectful and unstable environment—but our DCP caseworker never intervened. Why? Because she formed a personal friendship with my mother. We visited her home. They would sit and smoke together, catch up outside of official visits, and to this day they remain in contact.

When I became an adult, I obtained the reports through Freedom of Information. I was shocked to read how much our situation had been downplayed or glossed over.

Despite years of instability and risk, my siblings and I were left in my mother’s care. I firmly believe that the caseworker’s personal relationship with her clouded her judgement and contributed to a failure to act.

This is not an isolated experience. Other children have lost their lives because of similar breakdowns in accountability.

 

The Bigger Problem:

Across Australia, DCP (or equivalent) workers regularly conduct home visits alone. These visits often happen behind closed doors, with no oversight or second opinion. This leaves room for:

Biased reporting

Unprofessional relationships between workers and parents

Missed red flags in abusive or unsafe environments

Emotional manipulation of workers or families

Children being left in dangerous homes due to inaccurate or minimised reports

 

What the Data Says:

According to Australia’s National Child Protection Data (AIHW), over 178,000 children received child protection services in 2022–23.

One in three (32%) had previously been the subject of a child protection investigation.

Over 50 children have died in recent years in Australia while known to child protection, including high-profile cases like Mason Jet Lee and Darcey Freeman, where system failures played a role.

Multiple state inquiries and coronial reports have highlighted lack of oversight and worker accountability as contributing factors in these cases.

 

What Needs to Change:

 

We are calling for:

1. Mandatory paired visits for all home assessments, interviews, and follow-ups

2. Rotating staff teams to prevent familiarity or bias from forming.  Keeping one of the case worker the same for rapport building need and having the second worker in constant rotation. 

3. Clear documentation and co-signing of visit notes by both workers

4. External review of critical cases involving ongoing or escalating risk

 

Why This Works:

Double staffing adds protection for both children and workers

It brings accountability, reduces risk of misconduct or negligence

It’s already the standard in other care-based professions—police, hospital welfare checks, even some aged care visits

 

Sign if You Agree:

Every child deserves protection without politics or personal agendas. If a single change in structure could prevent another child from slipping through the cracks, why wouldn’t we make it?

 

Please sign this petition and help push for a national standard that prioritises children over convenience.