Suchergebnisse

This article discusses the relation between civil and religious marriage, at the interface between the state's legal discourse and the discourses and practices of Norwegian mosques. A central question is what kinds of effects the governance of Islam in Norway has had in the field of marriage. Against the background of political debates on the system of marriage authorization of faith communities, the analysis draws on interviews with public officials and administrative leaders of mosques, the majority of whom are authorized to perform legal marriage. While the Norwegian state concept of marriage authorization is based on a separation of the civil act and the religious act, mosque administrators rather highlight the similarity and continuity between the two. Contrary to state concerns, though, the analysis suggests that the civil marriages have affected the religious, rather than vice versa. What is interesting is that this reasoning actually results in Norwegian marriage certificates replacing or suppressing the Islamic marriage contract, although agreements on mahr (dower) are still made more informally. Thus, our findings suggest that there has been a secularizing effect. ; acceptedVersion

This article discusses the relation between civil and religious marriage, at the interface between the state's legal discourse and the discourses and practices of Norwegian mosques. A central question is what kinds of effects the governance of Islam in Norway has had in the field of marriage. Against the background of political debates on the system of marriage authorization of faith communities, the analysis draws on interviews with public officials and administrative leaders of mosques, the majority of whom are authorized to perform legal marriage. While the Norwegian state concept of marriage authorization is based on a separation of the civil act and the religious act, mosque administrators rather highlight the similarity and continuity between the two. Contrary to state concerns, though, the analysis suggests that the civil marriages have affected the religious, rather than vice versa. What is interesting is that this reasoning actually results in Norwegian marriage certificates replacing or suppressing the Islamic marriage contract, although agreements on mahr (dower) are still made more informally. Thus, our findings suggest that there has been a secularizing effect.

The Norwegian Directorate for Children, Youth and Family Affairs commissioned this report, which deals with the Child Welfare Service's (CWS) and the County Social Welfare Boards' (CSWB) handling of compulsory care order cases in ethnic minority families. The data consists of 91 anonymized and non-anonymized decisions from the CSWB, as well as 17 case files from the archives of the Oslo and Akershus County Social Welfare Board. Both the general limitations of a document analysis and the specific limitations of the CWS's presentations to the CSWB influence the study. Considering these data restrictions, the report is not an exhaustive mapping of the CWS's work. Instead, we have chosen to enlighten some of the topics that have stood out and of which we have substantial material to reflect upon. The report pinpoints a few tendencies and patterns in the CWS's work with ethnic minority families that can be problematic. Brief summary of main findings: The CWS takes reported concerns about violence seriously. They talk to, listen to, and put trust in the child in these matters. Especially in cases where the parents deny the accusations, the children are placed outside the home immediately and the parents are reported to the police. These cases make new demands on the CWS and its approach to the parents. We recommend a re-evaluation of what we call the CWS's admission paradigm . This current paradigm entails that the parents have to admit to violence in order to be considered as fit for guidance. In connection with the county board case we find that the child is listened to and believed. However, the case documents rarely state what information the child has been given and whether an interpreter has been used during conversations with the child. The mandate of the child's spokesperson, who is appointed by the county board, could profitably include more questions related to the child's ethnic, cultural, religious and linguistic identity. The parents' seemingly reluctant participation influences many cases, and often the CWS does not succeed in establishing a collaborative relation. The CWS finds these challenges demanding, and one risks that the case is not sufficiently informed. We warn against the tendency of overly interpreting the parents' mistrust as a poor parenting skill. The CWS's conversations with the parents do to a limited degree take into account the cultural differences of the definitions and expressions of child care competence. Besides, we find that little attention is paid to the cultural specificities of communication styles and what this could entail for the understanding and misunderstanding between the CWS, the child, and the parents. There is a need to develop methodological approaches as a supplement or an alternative to the conversation-based, reflective methods that dominate the mapping and guidance methodology of the CWS. Immediate placement outside the home after the child has told about violence is a case type that stands out with its own distinctive set of dynamics. We ask if this dynamic in itself can increase the risk of compulsory care orders. We especially problematize the CSWB's emphasis on the visitation reports of these cases. Here, there is a need for more knowledge and method development. A rejection of the application for asylum, an unsettled residence permit, or other possible judicial conditions for foreign nationals can affect parents' ability to take care of their children. These circumstances are rarely taken into consideration in the evaluations of the CWS and the CSWB. Greater awareness is needed on the impact of different legislation when the child welfare case and immigration case take place in parallel. The study's data on the national minority Norwegian Roma was very limited. Our impression is that the CWS struggles both with achieving a good connection with the parents and with finding actions that work. The families have complex problems and frequently move around. The CWS and the CSWB poorly reflect on the importance of the linguistic and cultural differences in these cases. ; Rapporten bygger på et forskningsoppdrag fra Barne-, ungdoms- og familiedirektoratet (Bufdir) om barneverntjenestens og fylkesnemndas håndtering av saker om omsorgsovertakelse i familier med etnisk minoritetsbakgrunn. Datamaterialet har bestått av vedtak og saksmapper fra fylkesnemnda. Studien er ikke en fullstendig kartlegging av barneverntjenestens arbeid, men løfter frem noen mønstre og temaer som kan være utfordrende eller problematiske i barnevernets arbeid med etniske minoritetsfamilier. Blant annet pekes det på at barneverntjenestens økte fokus på vold mot barn, tilsier en styrket faglig diskusjon om voldsforståelser og en revurdering av barnevernets erkjennelsesparadigme.

The Norwegian Directorate for Children, Youth and Family Affairs commissioned this report, which deals with the Child Welfare Service's (CWS) and the County Social Welfare Boards' (CSWB) handling of compulsory care order cases in ethnic minority families. The data consists of 91 anonymized and non-anonymized decisions from the CSWB, as well as 17 case files from the archives of the Oslo and Akershus County Social Welfare Board. Both the general limitations of a document analysis and the specific limitations of the CWS's presentations to the CSWB influence the study. Considering these data restrictions, the report is not an exhaustive mapping of the CWS's work. Instead, we have chosen to enlighten some of the topics that have stood out and of which we have substantial material to reflect upon. The report pinpoints a few tendencies and patterns in the CWS's work with ethnic minority families that can be problematic. Brief summary of main findings: The CWS takes reported concerns about violence seriously. They talk to, listen to, and put trust in the child in these matters. Especially in cases where the parents deny the accusations, the children are placed outside the home immediately and the parents are reported to the police. These cases make new demands on the CWS and its approach to the parents. We recommend a re-evaluation of what we call the CWS's admission paradigm . This current paradigm entails that the parents have to admit to violence in order to be considered as fit for guidance. In connection with the county board case we find that the child is listened to and believed. However, the case documents rarely state what information the child has been given and whether an interpreter has been used during conversations with the child. The mandate of the child's spokesperson, who is appointed by the county board, could profitably include more questions related to the child's ethnic, cultural, religious and linguistic identity. The parents' seemingly reluctant participation influences many cases, and often the CWS does not succeed in establishing a collaborative relation. The CWS finds these challenges demanding, and one risks that the case is not sufficiently informed. We warn against the tendency of overly interpreting the parents' mistrust as a poor parenting skill. The CWS's conversations with the parents do to a limited degree take into account the cultural differences of the definitions and expressions of child care competence. Besides, we find that little attention is paid to the cultural specificities of communication styles and what this could entail for the understanding and misunderstanding between the CWS, the child, and the parents. There is a need to develop methodological approaches as a supplement or an alternative to the conversation-based, reflective methods that dominate the mapping and guidance methodology of the CWS. Immediate placement outside the home after the child has told about violence is a case type that stands out with its own distinctive set of dynamics. We ask if this dynamic in itself can increase the risk of compulsory care orders. We especially problematize the CSWB's emphasis on the visitation reports of these cases. Here, there is a need for more knowledge and method development. A rejection of the application for asylum, an unsettled residence permit, or other possible judicial conditions for foreign nationals can affect parents' ability to take care of their children. These circumstances are rarely taken into consideration in the evaluations of the CWS and the CSWB. Greater awareness is needed on the impact of different legislation when the child welfare case and immigration case take place in parallel. The study's data on the national minority Norwegian Roma was very limited. Our impression is that the CWS struggles both with achieving a good connection with the parents and with finding actions that work. The families have complex problems and frequently move around. The CWS and the CSWB poorly reflect on the importance of the linguistic and cultural differences in these cases. ; Rapporten bygger på et forskningsoppdrag fra Barne-, ungdoms- og familiedirektoratet (Bufdir) om barneverntjenestens og fylkesnemndas håndtering av saker om omsorgsovertakelse i familier med etnisk minoritetsbakgrunn. Datamaterialet har bestått av vedtak og saksmapper fra fylkesnemnda. Studien er ikke en fullstendig kartlegging av barneverntjenestens arbeid, men løfter frem noen mønstre og temaer som kan være utfordrende eller problematiske i barnevernets arbeid med etniske minoritetsfamilier. Blant annet pekes det på at barneverntjenestens økte fokus på vold mot barn, tilsier en styrket faglig diskusjon om voldsforståelser og en revurdering av barnevernets erkjennelsesparadigme.

"Research, politics and activism have traditionally emphasized gender in understanding and combating domestic violence. In recent years, however, increasing attention has been placed on other social factors.

This anthology presents new research that elucidates domestic violence from more diverse perspectives. In the nine chapters, the contributors analyze how types and degrees of violence and abuse can vary depending upon the interplay between such different factors as class, ethnicity, gender and sexual orientation. An overarching theme is how we understand and talk about equality, difference and diversity.

The book does not provide an exhaustive analysis of violence in today's multi-cultural Norway, yet it is the first Norwegian book about domestic violence that has diversity as a primary them. The book will be of interest to researchers, students, employees in social services and support organizations and anyone concerned about domestic violence and abuse." - "Forskning, politikk og aktivisme har tradisjonelt vektlagt kjønn for å forstå og bekjempe vold i nære relasjoner. De siste årene har imidlertid andre sosiale dimensjoner fått økt oppmerksomhet.

Denne antologien presenterer ny forskning som belyser vold i nære relasjoner i et mangfoldsperspektiv. I ni kapitler analyserer forskere hvordan voldens art og omfang kan variere basert på et samspill mellom ulike sosiale dimensjoner, som klasse, etnisitet, kjønn, og seksuell orientering. Hvordan vi forstår og snakker om likhet, forskjell og mangfold, er et overordnet tema.

Boken gir ingen uttømmende analyse av vold i dagens mangfoldige Norge, men er den første norske boken om vold i nære relasjoner som har mangfold som hovedtema. Målgruppen er forskere, studenter, ansatte i hjelpeapparatet og andre med interesse for vold og overgrep i nære relasjoner. "

Researchers are increasingly interested in why people want to participate in qualitative interview studies, particularly what they hope to gain from participating. The present paper contributes to this research agenda by analysing the motivations of victims of interpersonal violence: a group that is considered ethically challenging to involve in research, given their history of being intruded upon. The analysis is based on 174 qualitative interviews from three separate studies: two on intimate partner violence and one on sexual assault. A key finding is that many victims welcome the opportunity to participate and often use the interviews for their own purposes. We identified three different 'participant orientations', or ways victims relate to the interview and the research, including 'telling for oneself', 'telling for others' and 'telling for the researcher'. We discuss how these orientations imply different ethical contracts between the participant and researcher and their links to recruitment methods.

What role does physical and virtual space play in gender-based violence (GBV)? Experts from the Global North and South use wide-ranging case studies - from public harassment in India and Kenya to harassment on Twitter - to examine how spaces can facilitate or prevent GBV and showcase strategies for prevention and intervention. Students and academics from a range of disciplines will discover how existing research connects with practice and policy developments, the current gaps in research and a future agenda for GBV studies