What we cover
We examine how institutions respond when abuse, coaching or psychological pressure is alleged during a family dispute. Our reporting follows the source of an allegation, the way a child was heard, the reasons for protective measures and the support actually received.
The administrative claim reviewed by our team challenges the Agency’s treatment of disputed assessments, schooling, medical follow-up and the Public Defender’s concerns. We use that material to frame specific questions of public responsibility; the pleading is not a final finding of liability. [1]
Protection and fact-finding
A child’s safety and access to help must not depend on an adult first winning the entire case. At the same time, urgent action must not harden into an unreviewable conclusion. We seek clear reasons for restrictions, a record of evidence and a timetable for reconsideration.
The Lanzarote Convention provides a child-sensitive framework for assistance and investigation. Georgia’s civil evidence rules require reasoned evaluation rather than predetermined weight. Neither framework requires institutions to decide credibility by a parent’s sex. [2] [3]
Our research series
An allegation must trigger protection—not replace an investigation: how to distinguish reports, corroboration and findings.
Whose words are in the child’s account? Interview methods, translation, possible influence and the need to test alternative explanations.
Children need help before the court case ends: stress, recovery, schooling and completed support.
A father is not a secondary parent: equal treatment and the scrutiny of stereotypes.
Georgia has a child-friendly model. Access must become routine: turning available expertise into a dependable route for every child who needs it.
Read the linked articles below for the sources, comparisons and our proposals.
The changes we seek
Independent language assistance; preserved interview records; practical access to specialist review; a child’s own effective lawyer; timely medical and psychological care; and decisions that explain why a restriction is necessary and when it will be reviewed.
We invite families and professionals to contribute records and experience that show where the response broke down or worked well. Our goal is a system capable of protecting a child from genuine abuse, harmful pressure and avoidable harm within the protection process itself.
Legal sources & references
- Anonymised administrative claim reviewed by Child Rights Georgia.
- Lanzarote Convention — Articles 14, 30, 31 and 35: assistance and child-sensitive proceedings
- Civil Procedure Code of Georgia — Articles 102 and 105; consolidated Georgian text
