Errors and mistakes in child protection: an unspoken issue in Italy?

The issue of errors and mistakes in child protection is very rarely addressed explicitly in Italy There have been few public scandals of unprotected children or situations ‘denounced’ to the media by parents or families who felt to be victims of injustice or abusive practice. Unlike Anglophone countries, the Italian child protection system is not used to have enquiries on fatal cases nor in cases where conflicting interest arises, as divorce cases. Some reasons for this could be found in the ambiguity of the child protection system in itself (swinging from a narrow forensic child protection approach to a family support approach), or in the cultural attitude to keep hidden the recognition of errors. Following this discussion, the chapter presents an overview of existing domestic literature and research. It briefly traces the main elements of the Italian child protection system, with its changes from a paternalistic/specialised approach to a neoliberal and ‘familistic’ asset focusing on its fragmentation, ambiguity and unclear definition of responsibilities. It outlines the places where different discourses on errors and mistakes in child protection appear, (considering the public media, court proceedings and professional reflections, and how they have changed in the time. It describes the strategies adopted to deal (or to prevent) errors, drawing on results from qualitative research on how social workers deal with ‘difficult decisions’ and ethical and considering professional and institutional guidelines.

The Little Italian Slaves

This chapter examines Celso Cesare Moreno's crusade in defense of those he referred to as “the Italian slave children,” albeit with an ulterior motive. It first considers child labor in Italy and the plight of very young Italian street musicians, focusing on initiatives to ameliorate their conditions by individuals such as Ferdinando De Luca, the Consul General of Italy in New York, author Giuseppe Guerzoni, and Moreno himself. It then analyzes Moreno's criticism of De Luca and his publicity and lobbying campaign against Italian child slavery, using the New York Times as his primary tool and enlisting the support of two people best identified with the abolitionist cause: Senator Charles Sumner and Frederick Douglas. The chapter also discusses the so-called “Moreno bill,” introduced by Sumner in the Senate in January 1874, and its impact on the campaign to eliminate the presence of the wandering child musicians in Italy.