52 research outputs found

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

    Get PDF
    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

    The formalized framework for decision-making in child protection care orders : a cross-country analysis

    Get PDF
    Care orders within the child protection system are some of the most invasive interventions a state can make. This article examines the discretionary space governments set out for child protection workers when they prepare care orders. We analyse the formalized framework for these decisions in England, Finland, Norway and the United States. We focus on knowledge, timelines, how children and parents are involved and accountability. We find that Norway and Finland have highly de-regulated systems with wide discretionary space, whereas England and the United States are highly regulated systems with narrow discretionary space. The United States differentiates itself with relatively little parent and/or child involvement in decision-making. England and Finland do not have defined deadlines for terminating the process, and Norway has few directives on what information to collect. Such differences will influence the quality of decisions as well as the principles of the rule of law

    No Weight for “Due Weight”? A Children’s Autonomy Principle in Best Interest Proceedings

    Get PDF
    Article 12 of the un Convention on the Rights of the Child (crc) stipulates that children should have their views accorded due weight in accordance with age and maturity, including in proceedings affecting them. Yet there is no accepted understanding as to how to weigh children’s views, and it is associated strongly with the indeterminate notion of “competence”. In this article, case law and empirical research is drawn upon to argue that the concept of weighing their views has been an obstacle to children’s rights, preventing influence on outcomes for children in proceedings in which their best interests are determined. Younger children and those whose wishes incline against the prevailing orthodoxy (they may resist contact with a parent, for example) particularly lose out. Children’s views appear only to be given “significant weight” if the judge agrees with them anyway. As it is the notion of autonomy which is prioritised in areas such as medical and disability law and parents’ rights, it is proposed in this article that a children’s autonomy principle is adopted in proceedings – in legal decisions in which the best interest of the child is the primary consideration, children should get to choose, if they wish, how they are involved and the outcome, unless it is likely that significant harm will arise from their wishes. They should also have “autonomy support” to assist them in proceedings. This would likely ensure greater influence for children and require more transparent decision-making by adults.</jats:p

    Whistleblowing as a protracted process: a study of UK whistleblower journeys

    Get PDF
    This paper provides an exploration of whistleblowing as a protracted process, using secondary da-ta from 868 cases from a whistleblower advice line in the UK. Previous research on whistleblow-ing has mainly studied this phenomenon as a one-off decision by someone perceiving wrongdoing within an organisation to raise a concern or to remain silent. Earlier suggestions that whistleblowing is a process and that people find themselves inadvertently turned into whistleblowers by management responses, has not been followed up by a systematic study tracking the path of how a concern is repeatedly raised by whistleblowers. This paper provides a quantitative exploration of whistleblowing as a protracted process, rather than a one-off decision. Our research finds that the whistleblowing process generally entails two or even three internal at-tempts to raise a concern before an external attempt is made, if it is made at all. We also find that it is necessary to distinguish further between different internal (e.g. line manager, higher management, specialist channels) as well as external whistleblowing recipients (e.g. regulators, professional bodies, journalists). Our findings suggest that whistleblowing is a protracted process and that this process is internally more protracted than previously documented. The overall pattern is that whistleblowers tend to search for a more independent recipient at each successive attempt to raise their concern. Formal whistleblower power seems to determine which of the available recipients are perceived as viable, and also what the initial responses are in terms of retaliation and effectiveness
    • …
    corecore