Suchergebnisse

AbstractIn this article, children consenting to a care order proposal is explored as a form of meaningful participation as seen by care‐experienced young people. In contrast to health care and research ethics, almost no research exists on children's consent to child welfare measures. The findings suggest that instead of approaching children as individualistic rights‐holders, a more relational understanding about consenting is required, both conceptually and in practice, to acknowledge the social, emotional and power relations in which children's consent (or objection) becomes topical in child welfare. Without that recognition, consenting may be far from meaningful participation.

In this article, 'revisiting' refers to a variety of ways in which the researcher visits the research site again and in which the relations between the first and later visits are given some consideration substantially and methodologically. Revisiting may be done either for testing and/or enriching existing knowledge. It is claimed that time-aware research is needed in social work especially now when postmodern notions of continuous change are commonly present. Some ethnographic experiences of youth residential care are used to demonstrate the characteristics of revisiting. Revisiting tends to underline the importance of time, in particular biographical and institutional time and (shared) memories, as well as social relations within the field and their interwovenness. In the presented case study, revisiting highlights stability and changes equally and frames the issue of 'change' in a new way.

Tarja Pösö uses memory work with professionals to examine the intercountry adoption of Finnish children that took place from the 1950s to the 1970s. Since then, however, Finland has been a receiving country for children adopted from abroad and even the domestic adoption of those born in Finland is rare. The aim of the study is to shed light on the time, space and culture-bound character of child protection and intercountry adoption. The data consist of group conversations with the social workers, now retired, who arranged the intercountry adoptions. The importance of the data is emphasised by the fact that no research or statistics exist on these adoptions; indeed, there is little knowledge that they ever took place. The Finnish example shows that the need and opportunities for intercountry adoptions may vary even within a relatively short period of time. The current global pattern of intercountry adoptions cannot be considered permanent.

EPDF and EPUB available Open Access under CC-BY-NC-ND. This book explores how children's rights are weighed against parents' rights in a range of countries, and examines how governments and legal and welfare professionals balance those rights following the decision that children cannot grow up in their parents' care

This article examines children's and parents' positions as rights holders and family members in child welfare decision making as seen by social workers who prepare child removal decisions. The study is based on qualitative interviews with social workers, each of which includes the story of one child's case. The interviews were conducted in Finland, where the consent or objection expressed by parents and children of a certain age determine the decision-making process, as each of them can independently express a view about the removal proposal. The study highlights how family relatedness shapes the parties' autonomy and self-determination through intergenerational, interparental and other dynamics of emotional and power relations. Relational autonomy is emphasised more than individual autonomy in the social workers' descriptions. It is suggested that self-determination needs to be refined so that it acknowledges family relatedness as well as individuals as rights holders.

Summary Competence is an essential part of any decision-making process. In child protection, it is challenged by the controversial nature of child removals and the vulnerable situations which children and parents experience therein. This article examines how and on what grounds social workers view parents and children to be competent to give their informed view in care order proceedings and what they do if doubts about competence arise. The analysis is based on 30 interviews with social workers in Finland. Findings The professional ethos and ethics of social work were embedded in the social workers' descriptions of children's and parents' competence. The social workers were confident that the parents and children (of certain age) were competent to give their informed view about whether to consent to the care order proposal and the proposed substitute home. When they spoke about competence ascribed with hesitation, they described the vulnerability of service users, as well as their attitudes and withdrawal from contact. In the cases, social workers emphasized a strength-based view of children and parents and aimed to 'talk more' with them and to 'give them more time' to support their right to give an informed view. Applications Social vulnerability and competence should be explored reflectively in relation to decision-making in child protection. A better understanding of their interrelation makes social workers more competent to support the service users' right to be included in decision-making. Critical awareness is needed to recognize when 'more talk' is not enough to realize children's and parents' rights.

AbstractThe recognition of children as rights holders is a true challenge for any policy and practice that involves children, but it is even more so for making decisions about taking children into care. This article departs from the view that when children are perceived as bearers of rights, this should also be reflected in the institutional documents of decision‐making. That is why the documented layer of decisions about taking a child into care is examined here. The empirical data consist of documents of hearings (prehearing and hearing reports) in which children (33) are asked to give their view about a proposed care order and placement in Finland.The documented layers of involving children as rights holders are divided into two types: a minimalist type and a more individualised, thorough and detailed type. The former type represents children as rights holders in a routinised manner, whereas the latter one treats them in a particularised manner: how this particular child in this particular hearing received and gave information and on what grounds her/his view rested. As the documents may have some controversial implications, the recording of children as rights holders should not be treated as an isolated and technical issue.

This article examines the organisational models of decision-making regarding care placements in child welfare. Many countries currently report reorganising and economising their services and greater use of independent and voluntary agencies, all of which will have a direct and indirect influence on placement decisions about children in care. Very little is known about how public authorities make these decisions, what processes achieve the best option for a child and how different organisational models interact with front-line decision-making. The article is based on a study of placement decisions in Finland. The data comprise 49 phone interviews and five focus group interviews with social workers and their managers in charge of substitute care in different municipalities. The analysis presents three decision-making models: the holistic model, the shared expertise model and the centralised model. Each of these rests on different understandings of knowledge, expertise and client participation. The study predicts that the centralised model is likely to become more common due to the reorganisation of social services. While this may strengthen the managerial process and enhance the quality of decision-making, it is likely to diminish the relationship-based casework that is typical for the holistic model.