Improving the Care Order Decision-Making Processes: Viewpoints of Child Welfare Workers in Four Countries

Skivenes, Marit; Tonheim, Milfrid

doi:10.1080/23303131.2015.1123789

Cited by 11 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…We have asked court decision‐makers for their perceptions about the possibilities of improving the care order proceedings. Decision‐making on complex child welfare issues has received extensive attention over the years from scholars and researchers (e.g., Munro, ; Gambrill & Shlonsky, ; Britner & Mossler, ; DePanfilis & Girvin, ; De Bortoli & Dolan, ; Berrick, Peckover, Pösö, & Skivenes, , Skivenes & Tonheim, , Burns et al, ). These studies provide an important contribution of knowledge to the field of child welfare, professional judgement, and decision‐making in general.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Improving decision‐making in care order proceedings: A multijurisdictional study of court decision‐makers' viewpoints

Skivenes

Tonheim

2018

Child & Family Social Work

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Child welfare removals of children are among the most invasive decisions a state can make toward its citizens, and typically it is the courts that make these decisions. These interventions are regularly exposed to criticism. In this paper, we examine if and how care order proceedings could be improved in England, Finland, Norway, and California, USA. We have asked the judiciary decision‐makers about their view on what should be improved. Our findings show that the organization of the proceedings, including time and staff, are identified as issues in all four systems. Furthermore, the preparations by the child welfare agency are also mentioned as an issue, for English, Finnish, and Californian decision‐makers. Very few decision‐makers indicate features related to the individual, situational, and contextual dimensions, which is interesting since this would be expected from organization theory. The strong call for change in the way proceedings are organized indicates a need for modernization as well as better use of available competency from child development experts. The respondents focus on the elements that a decision‐maker has direct experience with and knowledge about, and this is indeed worth noting for policymakers in the four systems.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…An overview of the care order proceedings in Norway and the role of the county boards can be found in Skivenes & Søvig, 2017 and Skivenes & Tonheim, .…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Improving decision‐making in care order proceedings: A multijurisdictional study of court decision‐makers' viewpoints

Skivenes

Tonheim

2018

Child & Family Social Work

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To enable CWS to make better decisions and provide better services, we believe a lack of resources, heavy workloads, and high turnover must be addressed (cf. Skivenes & Tonheim, ). Our findings suggest that the child welfare system and its workers are the keys to a successful placement, not foster carers alone.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“We felt completely left to ourselves.” Foster parents' views on placement disruption

Tonheim

Iversen

2018

Child & Family Social Work

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this paper is to explore the reasons for unintended placement disruptions in foster care. Based on a semistructured survey, the paper presents the views of 132 Norwegian foster parents who have experienced placement disruption between 2013 and 2015. Foster parents rated several relevant causes of placement disruption: the child's behaviour, the need for care, concern for the well-being of their biological children, and lack of support from the Child Welfare Service (CWS).Although the child's behaviour was the cause most frequently reported in the quantitative data, CWS-related factors such as poor collaboration, not being valued and listened to, insufficient support and follow-up, and a mismatch between the child's needs and the foster carers' capacity were reported most frequently in the qualitative data. Placement disruption appears to be caused by the sum and interaction of several coexisting causes. It may not be the child's behaviour per se but rather the combination of challenging behaviour, concern for one's biological children, and insufficient support from CWS that lead to disruption. Good collaboration with the CWS in the form of respect, recognition, support, and follow-up appears to be of the utmost importance in reducing the risk of placement disruption. KEYWORDS biological children, child welfare, externalizing behaviour, follow-up and support, foster care, placement disruption | BACKGROUNDThe Norwegian CWS is embedded in a welfare state model that provides numerous universal welfare services to its citizens. Within this welfare state model, the CWS is responsible for services to particularly vulnerable children and their families. The Norwegian child welfare system is both a child-focused and a family service system

show abstract

“…The spokesperson may also testify in court. The county board usually consists of three decision-makers; a chair that is a legal scholar (Judge); a professional trained in child development; and a layperson (see Skivenes & Tonheim, 2016 for details). The county board hearing is an in camera proceeding in which the parties may orally present their arguments, opinions and evidence.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

Berrick

Dickens

Pösö

et al. 2019

Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

Improving the Care Order Decision-Making Processes: Viewpoints of Child Welfare Workers in Four Countries

Cited by 11 publications

References 16 publications

Improving decision‐making in care order proceedings: A multijurisdictional study of court decision‐makers' viewpoints

Improving decision‐making in care order proceedings: A multijurisdictional study of court decision‐makers' viewpoints

“We felt completely left to ourselves.” Foster parents' views on placement disruption

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

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About