The relationship between compliance and compulsion, and dynamics of diversion, in child welfare decision-making

Abstract

This article explores the relationship between (parental) compliance and (child) compulsion, within the wider dynamics of diversion, in child welfare decision-making. It examines how notions of parental compliance can be used by decision-makers to distinguish between compulsory and voluntary forms of state intervention in children’s and families’ lives. The article focusses on Scotland as a case study by drawing on empirical findings from a qualitative investigation into gatekeeping decision-making in the children’s hearings system, which found that notions of parental compliance are significant to decisions about whether to bring children within the statutory child protection system in practice. Key findings on parental cooperation, engagement, and acceptance are conceptualised as forms of ‘compliance’, linked to the existing international evidence base, and analysed in terms of state power and coercion, parental stigma and resistance in child protection processes. The relationship between parental compliance and child compulsion is scrutinised, in light of the procedural peculiarities of the Scottish system and wider proliferation of diversionary strategies aimed at reducing the numbers of children being drawn into formal child protection processes. The conclusion is that positive parental compliance may support diversion from involuntary child protection processes but there should be limits to reliance on negative conceptions of non-compliance to support direction into the statutory system.

Development of a Restitution Model Based on Justice and Legal Certainty for Crime Victims in Indonesia

“…The model of restitution mechanisms needs to refer to the diversion submission mechanism in cases involving juvenile offenders, where diversion must be pursued at the investigative, prosecutorial, and judicial levels (Hiola et al, 2021). The objective of diversion is solely to prioritize the best interests of the child (Smith, 2021), showcasing the state's intervention in safeguarding the child (Donnelly, 2023). Therefore, it is not excessive to emphasize that the goal of restitution also prioritizes the interests of victim recovery, and the state is justified in intervening.…”