THREE The child’s voice in the child protection system Jenny Clifton Eileen Munro wrote in her final report that a child-centred system must recognise that children have rights, including the right to participate in decisions that concern them (Munro, 2011b). Children have made clear that participation is not just about being asked for their views: it is about understanding and being understood, about knowing that their voices have really been heard and how they have been considered. At the heart of this is respect for the child and their experience of
mistakes in the Norwegian child protection system at three levels: the state, the court and locally. To establish an overview of the discourse on errors and mistakes, we have examined national audits and reports by regulatory agencies. The various regulatory agencies in Norway employ two main types of oversight: first, centrally planned, countrywide audits that examine predefined areas of child protection practice within a sample of agencies, and second, local incident-based audits and inspections that address individual agencies or specific cases. It is then up to the
SIX Older children and the child protection system Gwyther Rees and Mike Stein Child protection of young people aged 11 to 17 is a surprisingly unexplored issue. In this chapter we review two recent research studies in England that aimed to address this gap. We present the key findings from these projects and consider their implications in the light of the Munro Review of Child Protection and the government’s response. The Munro Review itself acknowledges some of the potentially distinctive aspects of child protection issues in relation to this particular
PART I Adoption from care in risk- oriented child protection systems
PART II Adoption from care in family service- oriented child protection systems
understanding how structural inequalities shape young people’s experiences of significant harm beyond their families, and how these inequalities mediate the system response (that is, government policy, the child protection system and its multi-agency partners) to young people who have been harmed. In this chapter, we consider how CS could support us to understand structural inequality and systemic harm when thinking about extra-familial abuse in adolescence. We propose that the framework and its accompanying methods, which have to date considered the contexts of young people
77 Critical and Radical Social Work • vol 4 • no 1 • 77–91 • © Policy Press 2015 • #CRSW Print ISSN 2049 8608 • Online ISSN 2049 8675 • http://dx.doi.org/10.1332/204986015X14502659300361 article What about my dad? Black fathers and the child protection system Anna Gupta, anna.gupta@rhul.ac.uk Royal Holloway, University of London, UK Brid Featherstone, b.m.featherstone@hud.ac.uk University of Huddersfield, UK This article explores social work practice with black fathers within the child protection and family court systems through the analysis of case studies
163 Families, Relationships and Societies • vol 5 • no 1 • 163–72 • © Policy Press 2016 • #FRS Print ISSN 2046 7435 • Online ISSN 2046 7443 • http://dx.doi.org/10.1332/204674316X14540714620166 open space Giving poverty a voice: families’ experiences of social work practice in a risk-averse child protection system Anna Gupta,1 anna.gupta@rhul.ac.uk, Royal Holloway, University of London, UK Hannah Blumhardt, blumhardt.hannah@gmail.com, Independent researcher, New Zealand ATD Fourth World, London, UK This article explores family members’ perspectives on
Introduction with wider social policies and social trends (see Parton, 1985, 1991). In this Introduction we offer a brief highlight but Chapters two and three provide a much more thorough engagement with past, present and, indeed if we continue on our present trajectory, future dangers and possibilities. The modern child protection system emerged in the 1960s rooted in a concern to stop babies dying or being ‘battered’ by parents, who were considered to be suffering from a lack of empathic mothering in their own lives. Poverty, bad housing and other social factors
17 TWO Children in alternative care In most high-income countries, the main reasons that children are in alternative care are family abuse and neglect. In China, due to the absence of an effective child protection system, very few children receive alternative care for these reasons. In China, children receiving alternative care provided by the state are mainly children without parents. Most children who are orphaned live with extended family. If they become state wards, the child welfare institution tries to arrange adoption. Otherwise, the most common
