The article states that the state's interest in protecting children from physical harm is well developed, and that generally, there is not a question of conflicting interests when the state intervenes to prevent a parent from physically or sexually abusing a child. In cases involving a violent or sexual offense, the offending parent is deemed unfit by society, and the state's interest in protecting the child's physical wellbeing is considered paramount to any residual interest claimed by the abusing parent. The discussion ascertains that as child protection has become a more prominent public concern, the state has developed an interest in protecting children from what are considered less tangible harms as well. The author concludes that in order to ensure that children have the capacity to develop and flourish as productive members of society, the state has recognized an interest in protecting their emotional welfare and psychological development. Parents’ inherent interest in directing the upbringing of their children and the need to do so within the confines required by society were acknowledged. Discussed also was the use of risk-of-injury statutes, thereby imposing criminal liability rather than civil remedies, in situations where an adult places a child's physical, psychological, or emotional wellbeing at risk. It was indicated that the state serves the dual purpose of influencing the social expectations regarding these situations and better protecting children from the harmful behavior of adults. 205 notes