Using procedural justice theory to understand public perceptions of child protection.

The psychological literature indicates that the public may expect child protection practitioners to respond punitively toward parents who maltreat children. This conflicts with the intention of child protection, who are not responsible for punishing those who have harmed children. Instead, many systems aim to practice under restorative principles, which are collaborative and inclusive of children and families. In this review, we consider the theoretical and practical implications of a tension between a public expectation of retribution and the non-retributive foundation of child protection, including the potential impact on practitioners’ wellbeing and their ability to implement non-retributive practices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]