Child Protector v Parents of XQD and XQE

• Jurisdiction: Singapore
• Judgment Date: 07 August 2025
• Neutral Citation: [2025] SGYC 5
• Court: Youth Court (Singapore)
• Parties: Child Protector,Parents of XQD and XQE

Child Protector v Parents of XQD and XQE

[2025] SGYC 5

Care and Protection Order No 000040 of 2025

Child Protector

Parents of XQD and XQE

Youth Court

Patrick Tay Wei Sheng

Children and Young Persons Act - Care and protection

Stacey Lopez (Ministry of Social and Family Development) for the Child Protector

The parents of the children in person.

7 August 2025

District Judge Patrick Tay Wei Sheng:

1. The Child Protector sought Care and Protection Orders (each, a “CPO”) for 12 months in respect of the two children of a family. Thereunder, the children would be placed in the care of their mother under the supervision of an approved welfare officer. Further, the children and their mother were to reside at a crisis shelter or the residence of a safe adult. The children and their mother were in favour of the application. The father of the children objected to the application. I granted the CPOs and most of the incidental orders that the Child Protector had sought.

2. The father is dissatisfied with these decisions and has filed an appeal against them. I now provide the reasons for these decisions.

3. The parents married in 2007. The children were respectively 16 and 10 years of age. The family had resided in China up until 2020, when they emigrated to Singapore. The mother remains a citizen of China. The father and the children are citizens of Singapore.

4. The marriage was tempestuous. Barely four years into it, conflicts and violence were occurring between the parents “once or twice a month”. By October 2024, the frequency of these conflicts had increased to “once or twice a week”. Worse, these conflicts had grown in severity with chairs thrown around the matrimonial home and the parents brawling with slippers. Occasionally, the elder child would intervene in the scuffles to attempt to restrain the father.

5. The events came to a head in March 2025, when the mother left the matrimonial home and sought refuge at a crisis shelter. The father continued to reside in the matrimonial home with the children. The Child Protector was concerned about the safety of the children there, exercised its powers under s 11 of the Children and Young Persons Act 1993 (2020 Rev Ed) (the “CYPA”) to commit them to the Interim Placement and Assessment Centre – Salvation Army Gracehaven pending its application for CPOs in respect of them.

6. The mother subsequently found rental accommodation with a landlord who had been a tenant at the matrimonial home but who had since procured her own apartment. The Child Protector corresponded with the landlord and assessed that she was a “safe adult” whose apartment would provide safe refuge to the children. Pending the determination of the CPOs, the Child Protector applied to the Youth Court for interim orders to return the children to the care of the mother, albeit under the supervision of an approved welfare officer.

7. On 2 May 2025, the Youth Court granted these interim orders and directed that the children were to reside with the mother at the crisis shelter or at the residence of a safe adult as assessed and approved by the Child Protector. The Youth Court added that the father was to abstain from visiting the crisis shelter and the schools and tuition centres that the children attended without the approval of the Approved Welfare Officer.

8. On 19 May 2025, the father appeared outside the gate of the school that the younger child was attending. He was seen by the Approved Welfare Officer, who deposed to this sighting in these proceedings. The Approved Welfare Officer deposed further that no approval had been granted to the father to so attend at the gate of the school.

9. On 21 May 2025, the father appeared near the apartment of the safe adult. He spotted the mother at a carpark and confronted her about an application for a Personal Protection Order that she had filed against him. The mother reported this incident to the Child Protector the same day.

10. On 22 May 2025, the father appeared once again near the apartment of the safe adult. He spotted the younger child and followed the younger child to the apartment. He entered the apartment and confronted the mother, who told the children to leave...