Detinue and Replevin: Arresting Children to Enforce Private Parenting Orders in New Zealand Family Court
Vol: 30, Issue: 2, Page: 74
2023
- 295Usage
- 4Mentions
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Usage295
- Downloads168
- Abstract Views127
- Mentions4
- News Mentions4
- 4
Most Recent News
Legal Issues - Seizures under Care of Children Act unlawful - professor
Source: University of Auckland Children's human rights are being breached by an outdated Act that was designed to provide for their care, according to a
Article Description
This Article argues that the seizures of children authorized by the New Zealand Care of Children Act to enforce private custody orders are unlawful and unjustifiable arrests. These seizures lack in either the substantive limitations of necessity or the procedural protections that should attach to such an intrusive and violent restriction on children’s liberty. It argues that their issuance violates children’s rights under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 and international human rights law. It canvasses the history of these arrest provisions and argues that they function as a mechanism for detinue and replevin of children, harkening back to a time when children’s status under the law was that of chattel. It documents how these arrest warrants have increasingly played a central role in the broader problem of the use of Family Court processes by family violence perpetrators to extend their coercive control over their victims and argues that these warrants have become a tool of social entrapment for victims.
Bibliographic Details
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know