"turn public sympathy away from the child "

Yes, the interests of the child clearly have to be the first and most important thing, as in any case involving children. And as I read it, the central worry of people like InOBU is that the interests of the child are very likely indeed to be severely damaged if it isn't handled a great deal more sensitively than it seems to have been.

Taking a child away from its community and family isn't a neutral thing to do. It's happened to children of Native Americans, and Native Australians and to Travellers of one sort or another, and it's often been seen as a kind of rescue from a lifestyle that is assumed to be damaging - and it's worked out very badly indeed in many many cases.

Yes, of course there are circumstances when particular parents can't be relied on to care for their children, and alternatives have to be found, temporarily or even lon term. But it's a delicate matter, and there's a real danger of doing real damage. Wherever possible it is far better to use relatives rather than strangers, especially strangers from a completely different culture.

Violence towards children is not an accepted and normal part of the Traveller way of life. It happens sometimes, as it happens in all kinds of families, and when it is seen to happen it needs to be effectively responded to, in a way that protects the child. But in a way that protects the child in all kinds of ways.