The society that we are living in has a responsibility to make sure that no children suffer from violence or any type of neglect. All authorities in society, as well as the social services and decision-making agencies have an obligation to protect and prioritize the best interests of the child in all types of decisions concerning children. In cases where children are at a tangible risk of harm due to circumstances at home, children can be involuntarily removed from their parents by law. In such circumstances, the child's parents do not consent to the child being taken care of according to law based on voluntariness. This requires a court care order according to LVU. In recent years, the public debate in Sweden has increased regarding when it is safe for a child who has been removed from its parents to move back home. Due to this societal debate, this study aims to define which factors affect as well as being most significant in the court's decision-making regarding when it is appropriate or not for a child to either stay in the foster family or to reunite with its parents. Furthermore, the study also aims to provide a deeper understanding on how the court considers on one hand the best interest of the child and on the other hand the parental perspective in their basis of verdict. The conflict of interest stands between whether the care of the child should cease or continue. The purpose of this study has been enabled through a qualitative review of 12 court decision orders which have been made between the years 2021-2022. The result shows that all 12 court orders decide that the compulsory care of the children should continue. The main reason in the courts basis for decision is that the circumstances that caused the care has not yet improved enough. In the review of the court decisions several significant themes occurred. One of the most significant themes were lack of lasting change among the parents. Moreover, another major theme was that the parents could not show insight in the situation. Lastly, the parents had a lack of ability to meet the children's needs, which in some cases were extensive. The result shows that the court considers the best interest of the child before the parental perspective. This appears while the court highlights each individual child and its needs. Meanwhile, the court also listens to the children who are old enough to express their feelings and opinions to a relatively large extent. Nevertheless, the court also shows understanding for the parents' will and desire to bring back their children. The court emphasizes what further needs to be achieved for the parents to reach a cessation of the compulsory care of their children.