Parents' involvement in care order decisions: a cross-country study of front-line practice

This article examines parents’ involvement in care order decision-making in four countries at one particular point in the care order process, namely when the child protection worker discusses with the parents his/her considerations regarding child removal. The countries represent different child welfare systems with Norway and Finland categorized as ‘family service systems’ and the US as a ‘child protection system’, with England somewhere in between. The focus is on whether the forms and intensity of involvement are different in these four countries, and whether the system orientation towards family services or child protection influences practice in the social welfare agencies with parents. Involvement is studied in terms of providing information to parents, collecting information from parents and ensuring inclusion in the decision-making processes. A vignette method is employed in a survey with 768 responses from child protection workers in four countries. The findings do not show a consistent pattern of difference regarding parental involvement in care order preparations that align with the type of child welfare system in which staff work. The goal in each child welfare system is to include parents, but the precise ways in which it is done (or not) vary. Methodological suggestions are given for further studies

Pathways to permanence in England and Norway: A critical analysis of documents and data

The English language term ‘permanence’ is increasingly used in high income countries as a ‘short-hand’ translation for a complex set of aims around providing stability and family membership for children who need child welfare services and out-of-home care. From a scrutiny of legislative provisions, court judgments, government documents and a public opinion survey on child placement options, the paper draws out similarities and differences in understandings of the place of ‘permanence’ within the child welfare discourse in Norway and England. The main differences are that in England the components of permanence are explicitly set out in legislation, statutory guidance and advisory documents whilst in Norway the terms ‘stability’ and ‘continuity’ are used in a more limited number of policy documents in the context of a wide array of services available for children and families. The paper then draws on these sources, and on administrative data on children in care, to tease out possible explanations for the similarities and differences identified. We hypothesise that both long-standing policies and recent changes can be explained by differences in public and political understandings of child welfare and the balance between universal services and those targeted on parents and children identified as vulnerable and in need of specialist services

Responsible Citizens and Accountable Service Providers? Renegotiating the Contract Between Citizen and State

New forms of governance, conditional approaches to public service access, and initiatives to engage citizens in taking on new responsibilities are being developed in the context of the scaling down of the welfare state. We examine the extent to which collaboration and multidirectional accountability can be developed between the state and citizens, with a focus on a case study of Community Contracts in England. These quasi-legal agreements, operationalised at the local level, involve citizens and service providers cooperating in tackling social problems through agreed responsibilities and behaviour. Findings from interviews and focus group research suggest that Community Contracts represent an innovation in governance. Citizens are given a voice and there are new pathways for effective service delivery and accountability; conditionality applies to citizens and service providers. However, although there was evidence of increased service accountability, the impact on civic responsibility and conditionality beyond already active citizens and beyond certain issues was less apparent. Although citizens and service providers were ready to take on new roles, the legal status of the contract was only loosely defined. Challenges remain concerning how contract-based approaches can be fully realised in practice