Introduction

Кулмала, Мэри; Jäppinen, Maija; Tarasenko, Anna; Klimova, Anna

doi:10.4324/9781003024316-2

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…According to opinion polls in 2013, only 9% of Russians thought that unhealthy children left without parental care (who have a high risk of ending up in institutions, cf. Kulmala et al, in press-b) should be in state institutions (Vorozheikina, 2013). In the same survey, 58% thought these children should be in foster families, Russian ones, as 36% of the respondents stated, while only 4% would allow them to US families, which confirms the official logic of solving the child-welfare problems domestically by Russians themselves.…”

Section: The Russian Family As a Core Concern Of Social Policy: Premimentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Fostering is the most developed component of the DI reform so far, while rhetorically strong emphasis on preventive work with birth families remains rather underdeveloped (Kulmala et al, in press-a). The residential institutions have been actively shut down and widely transformed into family-like environments, but there are huge differences in progress among the Russian regions, and the changes have not come without many unintended consequences (Kulmala et al, in press-b).…”

Section: The Russian Family As a Core Concern Of Social Policy: Premimentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Global deinstitutionalisation policy in the post-Soviet space: A comparison of child-welfare reforms in Russia and Kazakhstan

Кулмала

2020

Global Social Policy

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article compares how the global policy of deinstitutionalisation (DI) of child welfare travelled, was translated and institutionalised in two post-Soviet countries – Russia and Kazakhstan. These countries share a Soviet legacy of child-welfare systems dominated by residential care and have recently introduced similar DI reforms based on the global child rights framework. However, despite similar institutional legacies and post-Soviet conditions, the DI reforms have produced different outcomes in terms of the scope and pace of the institutionalisation of DI policy. In Russia, the DI of child welfare has been a fast-moving and sweeping reform, while in Kazakhstan, the implementation of DI has been an incremental and gradual process. We argue that the institutionalisation of the DI policy in two post-Soviet contexts was an outcome of the interplay between structural factors and the agency of policy actors who translated global DI ideology into domestic policy discourses. Yet, they were ‘sold’ with quite different discursive frames – one nationalist, another one trans-nationalist – in these two countries. We claim that the geopolitical position of a country is also a significant factor for framing and thus, in the end, in how child-welfare systems have been reformed.

show abstract

Section: The Russian Family As a Core Concern Of Social Policy: Premimentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Russian Family As a Core Concern Of Social Policy: Premimentioning

confidence: 99%

Global deinstitutionalisation policy in the post-Soviet space: A comparison of child-welfare reforms in Russia and Kazakhstan

Кулмала

2020

Global Social Policy

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Young people leaving care and institutionalised vulnerability in the Russian Federation

Disney,

Walker

2023

Children and Youth Services Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction

Cited by 2 publications

References 0 publications

Global deinstitutionalisation policy in the post-Soviet space: A comparison of child-welfare reforms in Russia and Kazakhstan

Global deinstitutionalisation policy in the post-Soviet space: A comparison of child-welfare reforms in Russia and Kazakhstan

Young people leaving care and institutionalised vulnerability in the Russian Federation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About