Three children aged three, four and seven were removed from their parents in Lanciano, in the province of Chieti, and placed in a family home.

The intervention was attributed to social services, with police assistance and alleged authorization from prosecutorial authorities. The competent court for the case was identified as the juvenile court of L'Aquila.

According to reporting by Il Mattino, ANSA and la Repubblica, the reported grounds for the removal included alleged hygiene and sanitary problems in the home and the presence of dogs. The parents and their lawyers contested those allegations.

The family's lawyers said the two younger children were taken from the home and the oldest child was taken from school, describing the intervention as sudden. Pietro Loffredo, the father, said he was initially unable to speak with his children. He said he had been given no information about them, in his words: "Non mi dicono nulla di loro." He added that he had been told he could see them on the following Tuesday.

Lawyers Angelo and Sergio Pisani, acting for the family, said they would seek full access to the case records. They disputed the account of the children's living conditions and said they would request urgent review of the legal basis and proportionality of the measure.

The reporting identifies Pietro Loffredo as the father of Fortuna Loffredo, whose death in Caivano is described as a prior family tragedy.

What the lawyers are challenging

The legal response, as reported, focuses on two points: obtaining the complete records behind the removal and asking the competent judicial authority to review whether the intervention was justified and proportionate.

The lawyers described the removal as adding suffering to suffering for a family already marked by loss, and said the parents rejected claims of neglect linked to hygiene and animals in the home.

What remains unclear

The full judicial order, the evidence underlying the removal, and any subsequent court decisions were not available in the reporting acquired for this article.

The published accounts rely substantially on statements from the family and its lawyers; a detailed account from the authorities was not independently documented in those sources. The exact timing and conditions of parental contact after the initial removal also remain unclear.