UDTR — Radar mondial des droits de la Nature

Permanent care in focus: A critical legal examination of Special Guardianship in the care and protection system of New Zealand

Identification

Clé publique

doi:10.82348/our-archive.00299

Auteurs

Michael Philip Morrison

Année déclarée

2026

Langue déclarée

en

Type source

dissertation

Première détection

2026-11-09T19:04:47.938170+00:00

Dernière observation des métadonnées

2026-11-09T19:04:47.938170+00:00

Dernière vérification HTTP

Non effectuée

Résumé documentaire — langue originale

This thesis focuses on special guardianship pursuant to ss 110A, 113A and 113B of the Oranga Tamariki Act 1989 which is a controversial and yet under-researched area of the law. Special guardianship orders (SGO) were first introduced into law in New Zealand in 2016 in response to permanent caregivers reporting significant placement instability and breakdown owing to disruptive behaviour from a child’s other guardians. A SGO allows the court to award permanent caregivers exclusive guardianship rights, to the exclusion of all others, if it is satisfied that it is necessary for the purpose of providing the child or young person with a long-term, safe, nurturing, stable, and secure environment that enhances their interests. However, the way the special guardianship provisions were drafted has been criticised by family lawyers and judges as being a legislative labyrinth, inconsistent with tikanga Māori, and adoption by stealth. Accordingly, this thesis provides a critical examination of the law of special guardianship and the permanency policy which supports it. In doing so, it deploys the child development theories of attachment, belonging and resilience to understand the necessary ingredients for children to thrive in permanent care and considers whether the objectives of special guardianship and the national permanency policy are fit for purpose. The legislative and policy development of special guardianship is also considered, and it is found that oversights in the early development stages have led to deleterious and unintended consequences. Indeed, owing to significantly poor legislative drafting, the Family Court briefly euthanised special guardianship for want of a sufficient statutory power to make the order. The remedy to this issue required an incisive decision from the High Court and a subsequent legislative amendment. Further, some members of the Family Court bench have found SGOs to be fundamentally inconsistent with the tikanga Māori principles of the Oranga Tamariki Act and one of the issues this thesis seeks to address is whether special guardianship can be interpreted in a way which is consistent with tikanga. It also critically reviews the statutory thresholds for SGOs noting that different, and arguably discriminatory, thresholds apply depending on whether a child’s permanent care has already been secured by orders made pursuant to the Care of Children Act 2004. This thesis develops and relies upon a principled theoretical framework to navigate these issues utilising the principles of human dignity and mana tamaiti, the sanctity of life, autonomy, non-maleficence, beneficence, justice and whanaungatanga. It also conducts an international comparative analysis of the permanency and special guardianship laws of England & Wales, Canada (British Columbia and Manitoba), and Australia (Western Australia and the Northern Territory) to see whether there are policy and legislative innovations which can be applied in New Zealand. In doing so, it makes the case for substantive reforms, including the development of a clear child placement framework to assist busy social workers, lawyers and the judiciary when making decisions on whether and how kin and non-kin caregivers should be awarded the permanent care of the child including, but not limited to, becoming a special guardian.

Identifiants

OPENALEX

W7171415441

DOI

10.82348/our-archive.00299

Repères documentaires

Famille documentaire

Thèse

Types déclarés par les sources

dissertation

Juridictions étudiées — sources explicites

AU · CA · NZ

Entités naturelles mentionnées

Territoire

Les mentions d’entités ne constituent pas une preuve de reconnaissance juridique. La juridiction étudiée est distincte du pays d’affiliation des auteurs.

Sources

OpenAlex · Document 1 · Document 2

• DOI · https://doi.org/10.82348/our-archive.00299
• OpenAlex · https://openalex.org/W7171415441

Statut documentaire

Pertinence à examiner

Bibliothèque

Cette identité n’est pas encore intégrée à la Bibliothèque juridique.