Maybe we should worry about errors the child can live with.
If a child is taken away and there’s no problem, at some point the parent will be able to regain that child. But if the child is not taken away and there’s a problem, that child will have no chance.
I have a family member who works with abused children and I can’t tell you how ofent the court has sent back children to the abusive biological parent for “family reunification” or because it will make said parent feel better about him or herself...and the child ends up dead or hideously abused.
We should err on the side of the defenseless child. Adults can work it out later.
There is no way these kids should have been sent to visit their father at any time, even supervised (as this was supposed to be).
If a child is taken away and there’s no problem, at some point the parent will be able to regain that child. But if the child is not taken away and there’s a problem, that child will have no chance.
The part you're leaving out is what happens to the child when the state takes the child away from the parents.
Now we have bureaucrats deciding which bureaucrat approved foster home the kid ends up in. It could very well be worse than what they were experiencing at the hands of their parents.
And as far as your example of a child returning to their home once the bureaucrats approve, the child, even in a short amount of time in a foster home, could suffer traumatic psychological or physical abuse.
I don't envy the people who have to make these decisions precisely because I know how even a small mistake can result in a horrible tragedy.