In your best interest
A study of how children have experienced being heard in child welfare services and how the Capabilities Approach could strengthen the understanding of the child’s best interests.
- Trial lecture starts at 10.15
- Public defence starts at 12.30
Title of trial lecture: The Capabilities Approach for framing the assessment of the child's best interests – conditions, challenges and ways forward
Disputation chair: Professor and Head of Department Siri Håvås Haugland, Department of Psychosocial Health.
Assessment committee
- First opponent: Professor Tarja Pösö, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Tampere, Finland,
- Second opponent: Professor Julia Köhler-Olsen, Department of Social Work, Child Welfare and Social Policy, Oslo Metropolitan University
- Chair of assessment committee: Professor Eivind Engebretsen, Department of Psychosocial Health, University of Agder
Supervisors in the doctoral work
Main supervisor:
- Professor Anders Johan Wickstrøm Andersen, Faculty of Health and Sport Sciences, University of Agder
Co-supervisors:
- Professor Marianne Klungland Bahus, Department of Law, University of Agder.
- Associate professor emerita Venke Frederike Johansen, Department of Psychosocial Health, University of Agder.
Summary of thesis
Over the last couple of years, the Norwegian Child Welfare Services (CWS) has been subject to considerable criticism, both domestic and international. Norway has been accused of “stealing” children from their parents with the intent of forming children’s upbringing in a way the state finds appropriate, with little respect for cultural and/or individual differences related to parental practice. The essential question has been and is how Norway might secure the right and the principle of the child’s best interests, at the same time respecting parents’ rights to respect for private and family life, also understood as the biological principle. Norway has been convicted by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in over 20 cases related to CWS from 1996 to February 2024 – all except two cases in the last five years. Norway has received particular criticism for its scarce resort to individual adaptation for contact between child and parents in several cases in which CWS has decided on a care order.
The overall aim of this doctoral work is to explore analyse and discuss if and in what way the capabilities, as developed in the Capabilities Approach (CA) of the philosopher Martha C. Nussbaum, can supplement a best-interest evaluation of the child with the child’s right to be heard held as essential. This includes if and in what way(s) children and young people have experienced being heard and participating in decisions concerning themselves in their encounters with public authorities in a national and international child welfare context.
Three different qualitative research methods have been used to address the overall aim: a systematic review, individual qualitative interviews and text analysis of two cases described in books, media, and Norwegian and international courts. The first study is a systematic literature review to identify and systematize scientific articles based on qualitative research methods on children’s experiences of being heard in a child welfare context on their best interests. In the second study, we conducted qualitative in-depth interviews with nine young people who had been or were in contact with child welfare services on their experiences of being heard and participating in decisions made on their behalf. In the third study two cases were used as a data material, reported in the Norwegian public media, one of them brought to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, and texts describing the Capabilities Approach. This choice was made to explore, analyse and discuss the complexity involved in deciding on the child’s best interests, when this right and principle is weighed against the parents’ right to private and family life (the biological principle).
The findings of the first study indicate that there might be a challenge related to the operationalization of children’s right to be heard in a child welfare context. Without the child’s own voice, a significant part of a concrete and individual assessment of the child’s best interests is missing. We found that children and young people with a history of being exposed to severe violence, neglect and/or abuse seem to have reduced opportunities to participate.
These findings were present in all the reviewed articles for the first study and in all three studies included in this doctoral work. In the second study, the interviewees emphasized the importance of being heard in decisions concerning themselves, despite their vulnerability. When interviewed on experiences of being heard in the Norwegian child welfare services, six of nine interviewees gave descriptions of not being heard. In this study we suggest a combination of Nussbaum’s CA and the procedure of participation developed by Skivenes and Strandbu to obtain an inside perspective of the child’s best interests. The third study suggests the Capabilities Approach to supplement an evaluation and assessment of the child’s best interests in a child welfare context, offering elements for what to evaluate for a comprehensive decision on the child’s best interests.
What to do as an online audience member
The disputation is open to the public. To follow the trial lecture and the public defence online, register on Zoom.
We ask online audience members to join no earlier than 10 minutes in advance. After these times, you can leave and rejoin the meeting at any time.
Opponent ex auditorio:
Deadline for the public to pose questions is during the break between the two opponents. Questions ex auditorio can be submitted to Professor Siri Håvås Haugland, copy PhD adm. Siri Orvik.