The enforcement of family law is a significant actor in the welfare state's regulation of the domestic sphere. This article analyses how the child and different conceptions about children's welfare become constructed through the legal proceedings and decisions when divorced or separated parents have disputes over contact with their children: who is allowed to speak during the proceedings and which arguments about what is best for the child are considered as valid? The empirical basis for the analysis consists of 75 complicated disputes over child contact which were handled by the judicial authority in Denmark. The analysis deals with the key actors in the field and identifies several constructions about the child and ‘the child's best interest’. The dominant rationale was elaborated on the basis of the judicial discourse and its professionals: this discourse is based on a limited-content definition of ‘what is best for the child’ and has the purpose of maintaining the idea of a normalized parenthood. The consequences of this construction for the involved children are discussed.
Introduction: This article reviews research results obtained using the Danish Longitudinal Survey of Children born in 1995 (DALSC), which is placed at SFI, the Danish National Centre for Social Research. DALSC aims to gain insight into children's growing-up conditions in contemporary society. DALSC consists of three subsamples: (1) children of Danish mothers; (2) children of ethnic minority mothers; and (3) children in out-of-home care. Four waves of data collections have been carried out since 1996. Being designed with the purpose of obtaining rich and detailed information about children's development and family life, register data was not connected to DALSC before 2006. Research topics: By using three categories of children as examples (ethnic minority children, vulnerable children, and children in out-of-home care), the article shows how register data gradually has gained ground in research upon children's health conditions. Conclusion: We expect to see a more extensive use of administrative registers as basis for the analyses in future research.
Med udgangspunkt i forskning om child well-being undersøger artiklen, hvilke implikationer det har for fænomenet børnefattigdom, når man anvender forskellige målingsinstrumenter til at afgrænse den del af børnepopulationen, som har en opvækst med utilstrækkelige materielle ressourcer. Analysen fokuserer på tre dimensioner: 1) Andelen af fattige (større) børn, 2) betydninger ved at være et fattigt barn og 3) årsager til, at børn lever i fattigdom. Med register- og survey-data fra Forløbsundersøgelsen af børn født i 1995, der var 15 år i 2011, viser analysen, at andelen af fattige børn er 3-7 pct., og at andelen af fattige børn er øget gennem denne kohortes opvækst. Om sammenhænge mellem fattigdom og centrale områder af hverdagslivet indikerer analysen, at fattige 15-årige hyppigere er udsatte og ledes ud på et spor, der kan føre til marginalisering ikke kun aktuelt, men også på lang sigt. Artiklen peger på, at de anvendte instrumenter til at måle fattigdom gør en forskel, idet en survey-baseret metode, der direkte spørger til familiernes økonomiske råderum, forekommer at være mest sensitiv i forhold til at indfange forskelle i børns levevilkår i hverdagen. ENGELSK ABSTRACT: Mai Heide Ottosen and Peter Rohde Skov: Poverty among Children Born in 1995 This article examines the implications of different measures of poverty for defining and understanding child poverty. It is based on recent research on child wellbeing. The analysis focuses on three dimensions of child poverty: the proportion of poor children, implications of being a poor child, and the explanations why children are living in poverty. Using register and survey data from the Danish Longitudinal study of the 1995-cohort (aged 15 in 2011) the analysis estimates the proportion of poor children to be 3-7 per cent; however the proportion of poor children has increased during the childhood of this cohort. With regard to the links between poverty and key areas of everyday life, the analysis suggests that poor children tend to be more socially vulnerable than their non-poor peers. Some of them may be at risk of social marginalization not only at present, but also in the future. The article suggests that different measures of poverty may lead to different insights. Thus, survey-based methods that directly ask families about their financial scope and deprivation appear to be the most sensitive to capture differences in children’s everyday lives. Key words: Child poverty, Danish Longitudinal Study, everyday life.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.