In most interventions relating to children, it is apparent that children are deemed to be persons who cannot take independent decisions and lack the legal capacity to undertake numerous responsibilities. Hence, most of the obligations and responsibilities that are placed on children in developing services and policies for their best interest revert to their parents and carers (Foley & Leveret, 2008). This is because, for any practical purposes, any implementation of policy cannot be based on the assumption of the cooperation of children. This is not likely to be reasonable and logical.

Hence, parents have responsibilities and obligations to play a legal role to take obligations reverts to parents and carers. Therefore, there is a logical situation where parents are required to be given a primary and fundamental role for children. When the obligation shifts to carers, this obligation moves to carers. This creates a mutual relationship that helps the child to be given the right attention and the right training and guidance for the implementation of positive policies to improve their lives.

Authorities indicate that adult and children are both opened to dangers and negative circumstances but children are somewhat helpless and less equipped to carry out things in order to deal with the risks and problems that come with dangers&nbsp.(Collins & Foley, 2008). Therefore, it is a natural tendency for parents and children to come up with the best ways of improving and enhancing the ways and manners in which children can be improved. The natural consequence of this is that parents become the automatic custodians of the changes and the modifications that come with policies and the implementation of policies. This puts parents and carers in a position where they are able to deal with the issues and problems the policy addresses and this leads to a situation where a natural consequence is formed and evolves that is based on the centrality of parents.