Nothing government does is more important than protecting those least able to protect themselves. Children — particularly the depressingly-too-many Texas children abused at home — are among those at the top of that list.

It is crucial that appropriate state officials have the tools needed to investigate and intervene in such cases.

But there also is nothing much more important for government to do than keep its nose out of families and the sanctity of the home. The family, in all its modern forms, remains the key building block on which a society rises or falls.

We must respect the right of families and their right to run their homes as they see fit.

How then do we simultaneously protect children from at-home abuse and protect families from unreasonable intrusion by officials who suspect abuse?

There is no simple answer.

Texas lawmakers — in yet another late-in-the-session, cut-and-paste job that inserted a dead bill as an amendment to a live bill — voted last month to give state officials broader power to get court orders to go into a home and remove a child for questioning as part of an abuse investigation.

Backers of the measure, including some state judges involved in such cases, called it a fair balance. The provision establishes specific standards that Child Protective Services must meet to get a court order, sometimes without parents' knowledge they are being investigated.

This is government business about as delicate as it gets. But as bill backers noted, it's sometimes necessary.

"Just as a criminal court cannot give a suspected drug dealer a hearing about a warrant before the police search their house, a family court cannot give a suspected child abuser a hearing before CPS interviews their child," said a recent op-ed article submitted by the Center for Public Policy Priorities, the Children's Hospital Association of Texas, Texans Care for Children, the Texas Pediatric Society and the Texas Association for the Protection of Children.

The groups urged Gov. Rick Perry to sign the bill, which included leeway for a judge to opt to hear from parents prior to issuing an investigatory order.

Opponents urged a veto. The Home School Coalition, backed by organizations such as Texas Eagle Forum and other conservative groups, sent Perry a 21-page letter outlining their family-first views on the bill.

"Parental rights are a fundamental, constitutionally protected right of all citizens," they accurately told Perry.

Last Friday, Perry vetoed the bill, saying it "goes too far" in granting investigators the authority to transport children from suspected abusive situations. Perry also cited "uncertainty" he said could "potentially infringe on the rights of parents and guardians."

The governor told the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services to develop "statewide procedures to follow when seeking court orders without compromising the rights of parents and families."

Easier said than done. In vetoing what looked like a solution as balanced as can be, all Perry did was identify the problem.

His staff said Perry received 17,373 calls and letters opposing the bill and only 455 supporting it. The numbers are impressive, but we must have missed it when this was put up for popular vote.

We see this as a case in which a governor should have gone for right, not referendum. Bill sponsor Sen. Kirk Watson, D-Austin, got it right when he said Perry "listened to bad advice, ignored sound, just policy and chose to veto a bill that would have helped protect the children of Texas from abuse and neglect."

When it comes to balancing the protection of family sanctity and the protection of abused children, there is no perfect answer. But we believe Watson's bill placed the burdensome responsibility for making those calls just where it belongs, with state judges – many of whom have expertise and long records in dealing with such matters.

Instead of calling for a study of how best to protect kids, the governor should have allowed this bill to become law.