Search

This paper examines the discretionary reasoning of the judiciary in three jurisdictions, England, Germany and Norway, in cases deciding whether a newborn child is safe with her parents or intervention is necessary. Our analysis focuses on one specific dimension of decision makers' exercise of discretion, namely, if and how the strengths and weaknesses of the mother are considered. The data material consists of all decisions concerning care orders of newborns from one large city in Germany from 2015 to 2017 (n = 27) and 2016 in Norway (n = 76) and all publicly available newborn removal decisions in England for 2015–2017 (n = 14). The findings reveal a high number of risk factors in the cases and less focus on risk‐reducing factors. The situation of the newborn is considered to be harmful, as most cases result in a care order. Judicial discretion differs by how much information, and what types of factors, are included in the justification for the decision. A learning point for decision makers and policymakers would be to actively undertake a balancing act between risk‐increasing and risk‐reducing factors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Child welfare removals of children are among the most invasive decisions a state can make toward its citizens, and typically it is the courts that make these decisions. These interventions are regularly exposed to criticism. In this paper, we examine if and how care order proceedings could be improved in England, Finland, Norway, and California, USA. We have asked the judiciary decision‐makers about their view on what should be improved. Our findings show that the organization of the proceedings, including time and staff, are identified as issues in all four systems. Furthermore, the preparations by the child welfare agency are also mentioned as an issue, for English, Finnish, and Californian decision‐makers. Very few decision‐makers indicate features related to the individual, situational, and contextual dimensions, which is interesting since this would be expected from organization theory. The strong call for change in the way proceedings are organized indicates a need for modernization as well as better use of available competency from child development experts. The respondents focus on the elements that a decision‐maker has direct experience with and knowledge about, and this is indeed worth noting for policymakers in the four systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ABSTRACT Using aggregated national data, this paper compares outcomes of Australian 'child protection' (CP) and Norwegian 'child welfare services' (CWS). We highlight each nation's context and key elements of their CP/CWS organizations, with emphasis on policy and programme orientation. System outcomes are examined along with the implications of their different approaches. The main policy focus in Australia is protection and risk, while Norway's systemic approach stresses prevention, early intervention and support. These differences influence practitioner's intervention strategies and how the needs of children and parents are met. In Norway, approximately 80% of the children in the CWS receive some sort of supportive services. In contrast, Australian services for supporting families are narrowly targeted. Both countries share the 'best interest of the child' principle and an increased focus on children's rights, and have experienced increased service demands and rates of children in out-of-home care. The paper explores the relative merits of these systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines how child welfare workers in England, Norway and the USA (California) perceive children's participation building on 91 qualitative interviews. First, analysing the data using Hart's ladder of children's participation, we found that all Norwegian workers perceived children's participation as some form of decision‐making, whereas 40% of English and 35% of US workers embraced views of children's participation that can be considered token or non‐participation. Second, we coded the data for main themes and found that child welfare workers in all three countries perceived children's participation as hearing the child's opinion and information gathering. The themes of age, maturity and ability to form an opinion also emerged from the data. English workers' reflections about children's participation were more nuanced than their Norwegian and US counterparts; and US workers understood children's participation as children providing valuable information during the investigation of a case more frequently than workers in England and Norway. We discuss the implications of these findings on future research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Placing children in out-of-home care constitutes one of the strongest public interventions in families. This paper explores how Norwegian Child Welfare Service (CWS) workers present their reasons as well as their work processes in the course of deciding to place children in out-of-home care. The analysis is based on interviews with 83 social workers and concerns 109 children recently removed from their homes. Three central elements were identified in the social workers' accounts: (1) a description of worrying conditions in the family; (2) the workers' long-term back-and-forth process, which revolved around experiences from the case, particularly around interactions with the parents; and (3) a triggering factor that made the out-of-home placement take place when it did. These elements underline the need to include both substance (conditions related to the child and his/her family) and procedure (conditions related to the work on the case) to understand what leads CWS to removing children. Both types of conditions put the parents, rather than the children, in the centre of the workers' attention, which may be explained by the position and role of the CWS workers as street-level bureaucrats. The findings emphasize the importance of acknowledging the contradictory position of CWS workers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Within the context of Norwegian Child Welfare Services, children's best interests are often promoted through inter‐professional collaboration. Although children have the right and desire to participate, research reveals that professionals do not listen to them. On the basis of qualitative interviews with 10 children about their experiences collaborating with professionals, we have identified ways in which professionals can facilitate children's participation. The findings show that trusting relationships, emotional support, and pedagogical approaches increase children's participation in their interactions with professionals. The results show the importance of including a relational understanding of participation as a theoretical concept in child welfare and an awareness that power and dominance are in play. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Evaluating the participatory opportunities for service users within social welfare institutions is a pressing issue. In this article, we explore a group of ethnic minority parents' experiences with child welfare services (CWS) in Norway. A strong narrative theme was deficiency positioning—how lacking a Norwegian normative set of knowledge and skills challenged the parents' opportunities to participate. We analysed how deficiency positioning was perceived, negotiated, and contested in the parents' accounts, and 4 themes emerged: (a) learning to parent, (b) contesting expert knowledge, (c) learning to be a client, and (d) constructing CWS deficiency. Nancy Fraser's concept of “participatory parity” was applied to explore how current institutional structures may enable and limit parents' participation. The analysis provides insight into agencies and informants' sense‐making processes as well as the diverse resources and strategies that parents draw upon in the CWS encounter. Furthermore, we argue that an interplay between a strong focus on “parenting skills” and bureaucratic and economic structures positions ethnic minority parents as deficient, thus providing powerful mechanisms for marginalization. Implications for case work and institutional levels are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BSTRACT [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this study is to examine the conditions for achieving free and open communication in collaboration. The context is child protection where ‘the best interest of the child’ is at stake. First, a theoretical standard based on free and open communication and equal partnership (deliberation) is presented. Secondly, an explorative analysis is undertaken of the collaboration process between professionals and service users in two review groups regarding two young people, Jane and Tom, both of whom appear to have psychosocial problems living in residential care. Thirdly, on the basis of this analysis, recommendations on how to improve collaboration in review groups are made. The findings show that collaboration has several functions: formal decision-making, legitimate decision-making and learning. There is a need to clarify the purpose of collaboration and strengthen structural arrangements as well as develop guidelines for handling challenges at different levels. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]