Children’s and parents’ involvement in care order proceedings: a cross-national comparison of judicial decision-makers’ views and experiences

Abstract

This paper presents the views of judicial decision-makers (n= 1794) in four child protection jurisdictions (England, Finland, Norway, and the USA (California)), about whether parents and children are provided with appropriate opportunities to participate in proceedings in their countries. Overall, the study found a high degree of agreement within and between the countries as regards the important conditions for parents and children´s involvement, although the four systems themselves are very different. There was less agreement about children's involvement than parents', and the court decision-makers from Norway and Finland were more likely to express doubts about this. Nevertheless, the main message from the judicial decision-makers is that they are relatively satisfied as to how parents and children´s involvement is handled in their countries. Whether or not this confidence is justified, the emphasis on achieving effective involvement of children and parents in court proceedings is likely to grow, with major implications for the workers, decision-makers and agencies involved.

Judging parental competence: A cross‐country analysis of judicial decision makers' written assessment of mothers' parenting capacities in newborn removal cases

“…Departing from research on parents and predictive factors relating to parental capacities that predict if significant harm is more or less likely (Ward, Brown, & Westlake, 2012), we examine which parental capacities decision makers emphasize as important for their decision to remove or not remove a baby from the birth family. Most countries and child protection systems have granted authority to the court or court‐like decision‐making bodies to decide intrusive and involuntary interventions into the family, including restrictions of parental rights (Berrick, Dickens, Pösö, & Skivenes, 2019; Burns, Pösö, & Skivenes, 2017). Our data material for the analysis consists of the written judgements that justify the necessity of any intervention in the form of a restriction or termination of parental rights in three systems.…”

Restricting family life - an examination of citizens’ views on state interventions and parental freedom in eight European countries

“…Government responsibilities for protecting children’s rights and securing children from maltreatment and abuse are supported and enforced in most high-income countries. However, how much protection that is considered necessary is interpreted in various ways across countries, as reflected in different thresholds for placing children in out-of-home care (Berrick et al, 2023 ; Gilbert et al, 2011 ), in studies of differences between frontline workers and judicial decision-makers’ assessments of similar cases (Berrick et al, 2019 ), and in studies of social workers’ opinions (Berrick et al, 2015 , 2016 ; Kriz & Skivenes 2013 , 2014 , 2015 ). There are also indications that views differ within the same country and between countries on which type of circumstances that requires government intervention, which rights to protect, and how much the state should and can do (Berrick, 2011 ; Berrick et al, 2022 ; Skivenes, 2023 ; Skivenes & Benbenishty, 2023 ; Skivenes & Thoburn, 2017 ; Benbenishty & Schmid, 2013 ; Burns et al, 2021 ; Schmid & Benbenishty, 2011 ).…”

Reglas de Brasilia: justicia para transformar la vulnerabilidad en igualdad

“…A partir de ello, los(as) trabajadores(as) sociales se desenvuelven ágilmente entre dominios y muestran competencias como el trabajo en equipo, la permeabilidad al cambio, la facilidad para la innovación y la comprensión de la realidad compleja (De Armas, Sabater y Cabezas, 2015;Quintero, 2010a). No obstante, es necesario que los(as) jueces(zas), los(as) abogados(as) y los(as) trabajadores(as) sociales promuevan nuevas competencias para satisfacer a los colectivos más desfavorecidos durante los procesos judiciales (Aguayo, 2007;Berrick, Dickens, Pösö y Skivenes, 2019;Gómez-Gómez, 2010;Pava, 2008). A pesar de que el enfoque de cada disciplina enriquece la labor pericial, esto supone un constante proceso de discusión y reflexión que debe ser controlado por la propia institución correspondiente (Simón, 2009).…”