Suchergebnisse

The Norwegian Parliament, upon deciding the establishment of the youth prisons, also demanded a research-based evaluation of the first unit in Bergen, on the work and collaboration of the professionals and of the implementations of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. The purpose of the project, according to the assignment, is: 1. to give the Ministries a decision basis for possible continuation of the unit and of a new planned unit with interdisciplinary team in the Oslo area, during and after the trial period. In addition, it will provide a knowledge base for legal and administrative changes in the various support systems for youth in prison or probation (health and social care, child protection and education) needed for the implementation of the UN convention. 2. to give advice and supervision concerning the operation of services during the project period, seen on the background of the present laws and regulations concerning children's rights of protection, education and health and social care services. The investigations in this reporting period show deficits in the overviews concerning the number of imprisoned juveniles. Our first report had a preliminary overview, based upon numbers from 2013. This is corrected, also on a preliminary basis, in this second report. Qualitative and quantitative data from fieldwork in the youth prison, from structured questionnaires and conversations with inmates and prison and youth care professionals, both in the youth prison and in other prisons, answer questions concerning the fullfillment of the UN convention of the Rights of the Child. The following is described in this report: - the youth prison in Bjørgvin until February 2015, the work with the new prison and the process of moving from the old building to the new - the prisoners experiences both with the Bjørgvin youth prison and with other prisons - the challenges with registering of the young prisoners in the correctional services statistics system - the experiences of the prison personnel with the youth prison and the interdisciplinary team, both in Bjørgvin and in other prisons in Norway. ; Dette er den andre av tre evalueringsrapporter til Justis- og beredskapsdepartementet fra prøveprosjektet med ungdomsenheten og det tverretatlige teamet ved Bjørgvin fengsel. Det ble igangsatt av fire departementer i september 2009 med hovedhensikt å implementere FNs barnekonvensjon. Denne delrapporten viser at det er mangelfulle oversikter vedrørende antall innsatte ungdommer på grunn avlite tilfredsstillende statistikksystemer. Koordineringen av tiltak både før og etter fengselsoppholdet er mangelfullt på grunn av budsjettmessige, organisatoriske og faglige barrierer. Ungdomsenheten bør bygges ut med to plasser. Det trengs mer kunnskap om ungdom generelt i kriminalomsorgen.

Source at https://doi.org/10.5324/nje.v28i1-2.3046. ; One of the most significant epidemiological tools for the perceived truth about contemporary Norwegian youth is in Ungdata, Youth Data. This is a continuous online-based survey grounded upon several and varying investigations of youth in Norwegian high schools, now extending to primary schools as well. The knowledge bases, epidemiological practices, technicalities, economic premises for the work and also data publishing is handled by social scientists at Norwegian Social Research, NOVA, located at Oslo Metropolitan University. State bureaucracies, e.g. ministries and directorates, municipalities etc. can ask for investigations and overviews. NOVA has an annual income for running the Youth Data through the Norwegian Directorate of Health of 3,3 mill. NOK (2018). The Youth Data registry has become a leading force in opinions, policies, polities and resource allocations for youth at municipal and state levels for several intended purposes. Based upon NOVA reports, media comments and interviews this article reflects upon some theoretical and methodological approaches to this unique epidemiological tool concerning youth, health and welfare. Questions arise such as: Is epidemiology a taken for granted neutral and objective kind of knowledge? Should there be ethical concerns for youth and their researchers as creators of knowledge, theory and policy – other than the normal ethical rules of scientific conduct?

In this article, we conduct an explorative investigation for a participatory research project in the Northern Norwegian Sámi areas. The contextual background is one of increasing conflict with the public welfare services reported by the media and by users. Public employees are unskilled in restorative practices, and the Norwegian mediation service is not adapted to Sámi conditions. We initiated an innovative process to test whether the Norwegian Mediation Service methodology could be used to resolve disputes concerning reindeer herding and whether this cooperation may contribute to mediation methods adapted to Sámi societies.

Is the concept of «social capital» useful to social scientific research concerning children and young people? Is it useful for the development of social policies? The report adresses these questions through a comprehensive literature review combined with discussions of research done by the contributors. At a youth research conference in 2008 the British youth researcher Janet Holland showed that «social capital» is often criticized for serving as a rubber sheet concept which is stretched in all directions to accomodate any issue we wish to focus on. A more concise meaning of the concept has still not been established. At the same time, however, the concept may serve as an aid to developing new analytical dimensions and new research questions, as well as adding new political questions to the agenda. Consequently we need an ongoing conceptual clarification, and it may well be that the most important mission of the concept is to raise the following question: «What kind of social relations serve actor X best in situation Y in order to achieve goal Z"? In the report we argue that the answer to this question is too context-dependent to enable a generalized undestanding of what kinds of social relations that constitute social capital across actors, goals, and situations. Through the literature review and discussions of the contributors' own research we show in what ways «social capital» may be concretized and made more precise. In the first part of the report we present a knowledge status covering relevant Norwegian and international research, in particular concerning the areas of generation, school, delinquency and locality. In addition we have included research on children and young peoples' welfare in a wide sense such as health, well-being, access to resources outside the family and participation in civil society. An important issue discussed here is to what extent researchers portray children and young people as active in creating and maintaining social capital. We have also reviewed literature directly using social capital as an analytical tool. In addition we have reviewed literature about phenomena that are often interpreted as social capital, like trust, social networks and participation in civil society. Since research literature about children and young people is prolific it was necessary to choose some functional inclusion criteria. We discuss what social capital may be understood as – and used for – with important contributions to the literature from our view as a point of departure. In addition we have developed some new concepts, like what we call sub-cultural capital and liminal capital. This serves as the basis for further clarification and interpretation of the concept, through discussions of how marginalized persons or persons on the borderline of society can have their own forms of social capital. The first part of the report focuses primarily on relevant research areas. We identify comparative as well as national projects, and projects utilizing quantitative as well as qualitative methodologies. We argue that social capital can be seen as processes that can be incluenced by political initiatives as well as through how institutions and professionals act. We also argue that research on social capital will not only result in new knowledge, but also lead to knowledge about children, young people and their families that is relevant for the practice field. In the second and third parts of the report we also discuss relevant literature as well as themes and issues for further research (perspectives, themes, and methodologies). We demonstrate the relevance of subcultural or liminal capital as concepts through analyses of two empirical studies. First, these studies underline that this perspective on social capital among marginalized groups helps us see resources and not only problems among thesegroups of young people. Second, the studies open up for a discussion of possibilities for a more dynamic understanding of the concept of social capital. Since this constitutes an extension of a concept that is already criticized for being far too comprehensive and vague, it remains to be seen whether this is an advantage or a disadvantage with regard to our thinking about social capital. ; Er begrepet sosial kapital nyttig for samfunnsvitenskapelig forskning og politikkutviklingen for og med barn og unge? Denne NOVA-rapporten svarer ved hjelp av litteraturgjennomgang og egen forskning. Begrepet sosial kapital kan bidra til nye forståelser og spørsmål og er kontekstavhengig av aktører, mål og situasjoner. Vi har vektlagt generasjoner, skole, kriminalitet, nærmiljø, helse, trivsel, tilgang til ressurser utenom familien og deltagelse - og forskningslitteraturens fremstilling av barn og unge som aktive i å skape og opprettholde sosial kapital. Vi utvikler nye begreper i forlengelsen av dette, subkulturell og liminal kapital, for å klargjøre ulike betydninger. Marginaliserte personer som beveger seg på grensene, de liminale, kan ha sin egen form for sosial kapital. Forskningen om sosial kapital kan få fram ny, handlingsrelevant kunnskap om barn, unge og familier.

The 4th International Indigenous Voices in Social Work Conference hosted by UiT The Artic University of Norway asked how the marginalization and exclusion of indigenous voices can be detected, prevented and healed. The conference also invited participants to take part in a dialogue on the use of reconciliation and decolonization as a restorative practice, Our aim is to provide new knowledge on the colonial aspects of our diverse histories, and to raise awareness of how the legacies of colonialism operate at macro and at micro-levels, and in politics, everyday life encounters, engagements and suffering. This conference anthology attempts to address the consequences of colonial violations, both in the past and in the present, and argues that new knowledge and practices are needed to restore indigenous ways of being, of living with each other and of living well and sustainably on and with the land.

This article reviews and compares the use of confinement and other restrictive measures against young people under 18 in child welfare and/or the criminal justice systems in Denmark, Sweden, Finland, and Norway. Young people are confined for a variety of reasons, including protection, care, treatment, and punishment. However, confinement of young people is a contested issue because it can be viewed as necessary but also potentially harmful. Comparison of legislation and practices reveals that while there are some similarities in the service provisions for young people, there are also significant disparities among the four countries regarding the organization, function, and frequency of the use of confinement and restrictive measures. While Denmark and Sweden use secure welfare institutions, Finland and Norway apply other restrictive measures. Despite the differences in approaches to confinement in the Nordic countries, the use of confinement is guided by the principle of the child's best interest, and the child welfare system is the main frame for confinement and intervention. The article discusses these disparate practices from the perspective of children's rights and identifies new avenues for research and practice. ; publishedVersion ; Peer reviewed

This article reviews and compares the use of confinement and other restrictive measures against young people under 18 in child welfare and/or the criminal justice systems in Denmark, Sweden, Finland, and Norway. Young people are confined for a variety of reasons, including protection, care, treatment, and punishment. However, confinement of young people is a contested issue because it can beviewed as necessary but also potentially harmful. Comparison of legislation and practices reveals that while there are some similarities in the service provisions for young people, there are also significant disparities among the four countries regarding the organization, function, and frequency of the use of confinement and restrictive measures. While Denmark and Sweden use secure welfare institutions, Finland and Norway apply other restrictive measures. Despite the differences in approaches to confinement in the Nordic countries, the use of confinement is guided by the principle of the child's best interest, and the child welfare system is the main frame for confinement and intervention. The article discusses these disparate practices from the perspective of children's rights and identifies new avenues for research and practice.