A little boy fell through cracks in the protection system

The killing of a child by their parent is rare in NSW. The cases are complex and distressing. Filicide by a mother is even rarer, and, research shows, usually involves mental illness. These cases raise questions about the role of child protection agencies in ensuring the safety of children.

This week, there was a particularly distressing case; the alleged murder of a four-year-old boy by his mother, who claimed to have consumed part of her son. It again exposed the frailty of the NSW child protection system.

The boy and his 32-year-old mother were known to the Department of Communities and Justice, which had received multiple reports of child safety concerns. The most recent report was 18 months ago, before they moved from Gunnedah to the Central Coast.

As police and coronial investigations continue, the widespread consternation prompted swift action. Families and Communities Minister Kate Washington announced the appointment of retired judge and former president of the NSW Children’s Court Peter Johnstone to examine the department’s previous contact with the family and if the agency responsible could have done more to protect the child.

Fourteen years ago, the Herald used freedom of information requests to show that, amid massive staff shortages, 61,308 children and young people were reported to the then Department of Community as being at risk, but only 16,409 were interviewed by a caseworker.

The system remains overwhelmed.

Earlier this year, the NSW Ombudsman found 65 per cent of the more than 244,000 risk of significant harm reports in 2024-25 were closed because there was no capacity to allocate the report to caseworkers, or caseworkers had been assigned to other priorities.

Since coming into power in 2023, the NSW Labor government has described the state’s child protection system as shambolic and said it would take years of work to get services on track. A $1.2 billion investment in the 2025 budget delivered a range of support measures targeting out-of-home care, including an increase to the foster care allowance.

“We are managing a system that was spiralling out of control. We are trying to turn it around – it has taken time to get where we are already, and it will take more time to ensure that we have the system in place that children and families of this state deserve,” Washington said.

However, on the Central Coast, hundreds of clients have been left in limbo as the agencies that handled their needs lost funding in a new program designed to keep children in their homes and prevent out-of-home care provided by non-government organisations, Families Together.

The reforms started this month but demand outstripped resources even before it began, and the transition has marooned many vulnerable families.

There are many pressing priorities that governments must juggle, and protecting children from their own parents can be complex and difficult. However, as this week’s case demonstrated, it is vitally important.

The department is not responsible for the tragedies that befall children. It cannot solve the problems of dysfunctional and dangerous families. It can only do its best. But the Wyong tragedy suggests a yawning chasm between risk and action.

Jordan Baker sends an exclusive newsletter to subscribers each week. Sign up to receive her Note from the Editor.