Application for extension of secure care — fighting — Oranga Tamariki Act 1989, ss 101, 238 & 368 — Seclusion and Restraint: Time for a Paradigm Shift (Human Rights Commission, July 2020). Oranga Tamariki ("OT") applied for an order for the extension of secure care for the young person. At the time of the hearing, the young person was in the secure care unit of a youth justice residence. Section 368 of the Oranga Tamariki Act requires the Court to be satisfied that the protection of the young person and others requires the detention. The young person had been placed in detention after several incidents at the residence, one of which was an assault involving a number of residents. The young person had not been the instigator of the incident, but had been witnessed by a staff member making insulting remarks to one of the victims. In the second incident, the young person had been observed by a staff member outside the residence. The young person's explanation for this was that he had just received some sad news about a family member and wanted to run. The third incident involved the young person hitting a staff member in the face. The Judge considered a report by the Human Rights Commission on the negative effects on young people of being detained in secure care, and noted that it was essential that a residence measures a young person's behaviour against their own therapeutic plan for the young person designed to address known challenges. Running away and fighting were known challenges of the young person, and he was entitled to expect intervention while in care in relation to those triggers. There was no evidence that this had occurred. The application for an extension of secure care was dismissed. Judgment date: 5 March 2021. * * * Note: names have been changed to comply with legal requirements. * **