European Journal of Social Work, , First published on 17 December 2010

Transcription

1 1 COVER SHEET Authors Sissel Seim and Tor Slettebø Full title Collective Participation in Child Protection Services: Partnership or Tokenism? Kollektiv brukermedvirkning i barnevernet: partnerskap eller retorikk? European Journal of Social Work, , First published on 17 December 2010 Author information Sissel Seim PhD Associate Professor, Oslo University College (OUC), Faculty of Social Sciences Tor Slettebø PhD Associate Professor, Diakonhjemmet University College, Department of Social Work. address: tor.slettebo@diakonhjemmet.no Corresponding author Sissel Seim, Oslo University College, Faculty of Social sciences. Postal address: P.O. box 4 St. Olavs plass, 0130 Oslo, Norway Phone: , cell phone Fax number: address: sissel.seim@sam.hio.no Word length: 6957 KEYWORDS: Child Protection; Collective User Participation; Parents; Children; Action research.

2 2 ABSTRACT This article explores how collective participation can help involve service users in the improvement of child protection services. Results from the action research project User participation and professional service in the child protection services (Seim and Slettebø 2007) provide the basis for our discussion. Two of several initiatives in the project aimed at collective user participation undertaken in cooperation with two Child Protection Centres in Norway are presented: a dialogue-based participation group for youths in child protection, and a group for parents who have lost custody of their children (The User Group ). The initiative for young people resulted in changes in the practice of the child protection centre, and The User Group provided the parents with the opportunity to influence child protection services. The findings suggest that there is great need to further investigate models for collective user participation in order to provide service users with the power to influence service delivery. NORWEGIAN ABSTRACT Denne artikkelen drøfter hvordan kollektiv medvirkning kan involvere brukere i bedring av barnevernets tjenester. Resultater fra aksjonsforskningsprosjektet Brukermedvirkning og profesjonell praksis i barnevernet (Seim og Slettebø 2007) er utgangspunkt for diskusjonen. Vi presenterer to av flere initiativer med kollektiv brukermedvirkning som ble gjennomført ved to barnevernsentre i Norge: en dialogbasert gruppe for ungdom i barnevernet og en gruppe for foreldre som er fratatt omsorgen for barna sine ( Brukergruppa ). Initiativet for ungdom resulterte i endringer i praksis ved barnevernsenteret, og Brukergruppa ga de biologiske foreldrene mulighet til å påvirke praksis ved barnevernsenteret. Våre erfaringer viser at det er stort behov for videre utforskning av modeller for kollektiv medvirkning for å gi brukere mulighet til å påvirke utformingen av tjenestene i barnevernet.

3 3 Collective Participation in Child Protection Services: Partnership or Tokenism? This article reports from the project User participation and professional practice in the child protection services, an action research project in cooperation with two child protection centres in Norway (Seim and Slettebø 2007).In the article we focus on how the collective user participation of young people and birth parents in child protection services may help to improve service development in general. User participation in child protection is usually limited to individual involvement. Until recently there has been scant attention paid to collective user involvement aiming at developing and improving the child protection services. Two cases are presented here: a dialogue-based participation group for young people and one for birth parents. We explore whether collective user participation helps service users to gain influence or whether these new practices are merely a façade of democratisation. Understanding the concept collective user participation We use the term collective participation when user participation to influence practices and policies is used to improve the collective good (Olson, 1995 [1965]). Here, we focus on child protection services and service delivery. The term collective refers to the goal of improving services for everyone in the same situation. Collective action theory (Olson, 1995 [1965]; Elster, 1985; Diani and Eyerman, 1992) uses the term collective to mainly imply that there is more than one participant, and the term encompasses the actions of a group, an organisation or a social movement. However, on some occasions collective action may refer to the actions of one actor, while it is the aim or goal that determines whether the act is individual or a collective (Elster, 1985; Udehn, 1993). The concept user refers to the role that children and parents have in relation to child protection, representing only a small part of their lives (McLaughlin 2009). In addition to being users, they are actors in their own lives and may have many roles in various social arenas (Sandbæk, 2002). Being child protection service users gives both children and parents a special stake in the service operation and legitimises their right to exert more influence upon these services than do other citizens. Although the interests of children are of primary focus, both children and parents must be considered users within this context. The interests of

4 4 children and their parents cannot be seen as independent entities, because these services often affect the entire family. A context for collective user participation It has been suggested that modern social movements have contributed to the increased democratisation of society (Tarrow, 1994; Tilly, 2004; Williams 2001). These movements have led to the recognition that all citizens should be autonomous and actively involved in decisions affecting their lives. Marginalised groups formerly characterised as passive victims now work for greater civil and political rights through social movements and self-help organizations and activities (Beresford and Croft, 2004; Halvorsen, 2002; Seim 2006). The challenge here is to further develop the potential for inclusion that exists in a fully participating citizenry theoretically, politically, and in practical terms. According to Marshall (1965), citizenship provides individuals with civil, political and social rights as well as some obligations. These rights are understood to include participation and influence in decision-making. Understanding citizenship as participation represents what Lister calls an expression of human agency in the political arena (Lister, 1998:6). The concept human agency underscores an action-taking quality of citizenship (Lister, 1998; Williams 2001). Citizenship in this sense does not simply reflect one s formal status, but rather, implies that every group in society can express its citizenship by actively participating in decision-making processes. The United Nation s Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) from 1989 provides another argument for user participation in the child protection arena. The Convention was ratified by Norway in 1991 and incorporated into Norwegian law in The document asserts that children under the age of 18 years share traditional human rights, civil rights and other freedoms. Respect for the integrity of the child and for children s opinions is given expression in UNCRC 1989, Article 12: States Parties shall assure to the child who is capable of forming his or her own views the right to express those views freely in all matters affecting the child, the views of the child being given due weight in accordance with the age and maturity of the child.

5 20 Mason J. and Gibson C., The Needs of Children in Care. Sydney: University of Western Sydney. Mason, J., A Children s Standpoint: Needs in Out-of-Home Care. Children and Society, 22, McLaughlin, H., What s in a Name: Client, Patient, Customer, Consumer, Experts by Experience, Service user What s next? British Journal of Social Work, 39, Olson, M., 1995 [1965]. The Logic of Collective Action. Public Goods and the Theory of Groups. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Oppedal, M., Barn og foreldres brukermedvirkning i et juridisk perspektiv. In: S. Seim and T. Slettebø eds. Brukermedvirkning i barnevernet. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget. Sandbæk, M., Barn og foreldre som sosiale aktører i møte med hjelpetjenester. Avhandling (dr. polit). Trondheim: Norges teknisk-naturvitenskapelige universitet. Seim, S., Sosialt arbeid frigjøring eller disiplinering av klienten? Nordisk sosialt arbeid, 4, (3), Seim, S., Egenorganisering blant fattige. Initiativ, mobilisering og betydning av Fattighuset. Avhandling til doktorgrad. Göteborg: Göteborgs universitet, Institutionen för socialt arbete. Skriftserien: 2006:3. Seim, S. and Slettebø, T Brukermedvirkning i barnevernet. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget, Slettebø, T Empowerment som tilnærming i sosialt arbeid. Nordisk Sosialt Arbeid, 20, (2) Slettebø, T Foreldres medbestemmelse i barnevernet. Doktoravhandling. Trondheim: Norges teknisk-naturvitenskapelige universitet, Institutt for sosialt arbeid og helsevitenskap. Sinclair, R Participation by children in care planning: research and experiences in The United Kingdom. In: Knorth, E.J., Van den Bergh, P.M. and Verheij, F. eds.

6 21 Professionalization and Participation in Child and Youth Care. Hampshire: Ashgate Publishing Company. Sinclair, R Participation in practice: Making it meaningful, effective and sustainable. Children and Society, 18, Solomon, B., Black Empowerment: Social work in oppressed Communities. New York: Columbia University Press. Tarrow, S., Power in Movement. Social Movements, Collective Action and Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Tilly, C., Social Movements , London: Paradigm Publishers. Thomas, N. and O Kane, C., Children s participation in reviews and planning meetings when they are `looked after in middle childhood. Child and Family Social Work, 4 (3) Udehn, L., Twenty-five Years with The Logic of Collective Action. Acta Sociologica. 36 (3), UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, Vis, S.A. and Thomas, T Beyond talking children s participation in Norwegian care and protection cases. European Journal of Social Work, 12 (2), Williams, F., Posisjonering av velferdsbrukere innen forskning: Fra passiv mottaker til velferdsaktør. In: M. Sandbæk, ed. Fra mottaker til aktør. Brukernes plass i praktisk sosialt arbeid og forskning. Oslo: Gyldendal Akademisk. Willis, S. et al., Are you serious? Involving Young People in children`s service planning. Child Care in Practice. 9 (3), Wibeck, V., Fokusgrupper: om fokuserade gruppintervjuer som undersökningsmetod. Lund: Studentlitteratur. Newspapers Drammens Tidende

7 22 Notes i Since most were under 18 years of age, the youth and their parents or foster parents both had to agree. In three cases, parents refused. One youth refused and another agreed, but failed to show up at the interview. ii In action research knowledge is to be developed of together with participants, who are asked to discuss formulations in written materials and reports, even though the researcher is responsible for the wording in those reports. iii One answered that he saw no point in attending, another that the meeting was too far away from home. A third did not want to attend because he found it depressing to listen to the other s stories about their negative experiences with child care authorities, and he was worried about what those authorities might do with him. The fourth gave no reason for not attending. iv Because of a time lapse of four months between the first and the second group interview, partly due to research requirements, the youths did not know whether or not their suggestions had consequences for child protection practices.