https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5326-6692
![Sample our Health and Social Care journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5938/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Health-Social-Care.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
This paper examines the public views – a total of 10,348 persons – on restrictions of personal autonomy of others to protect the interest of children. We use representative country samples of the adult populations of Austria, England, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Ireland, Norway, and Spain, and ask them to consider an experimental vignette with three different parental conditions: substance abuse, mental health problems, and learning difficulties. The findings display that most people would restrict parental freedom to protect the child, and a stricter restriction when the parent struggles with substance abuse compared to mental health compared to learning difficulties. There are some country differences, and when examining the role of institutional context of child protective system, a correlation is detected with significant differences between population views in a right-oriented system versus a well-being system and maltreatment system. In light of the ongoing European debates about child protection and how controversial and contested this area of the welfare state seem to be, it is interesting to learn (also) from this study that people, across countries, individual differences, child protection systems, overall are supportive of state intervention and support in a situation with a child at potential risk.
SAMMENDRAG
Denne artikkelen undersøker befolkningens synspunkter – totalt 10 348 personer – på begrensninger av individuell autonomi for å beskytte barns interesser. Vi har representative utvalg av voksenbefolkningen i Østerrike, England, Estland, Finland, Tyskland, Irland, Norge og Spania. De er bedt om å vurdere en eksperimentell vignett med tre ulike foreldreutfordringer som har betydning for utøvelse av foreldreskap: rusmisbruk, psykiske helseproblemer og lærevansker. Resultatene viser at de fleste respondenter ønsker å begrense foreldrenes frihet for å beskytte barnet, og at begrensningene er strengere når foreldrene sliter med rusmisbruk sammenlignet med psykiske helseproblemer og lærevansker. Det er noen landsspesifikke forskjeller. Institusjonelle forhold kaster lys over landforskjeller, ved at det er betydelige forskjeller mellom befolkningens syn i et barnevernsystem som er barnerettighetsorientert, kontra et barnevernsystem som er orientert mot å beskytte mot mishandling. I lys av de pågående europeiske debattene om beskyttelse av barns rettigheter og familier, og hvor kontroversiell og omstridt barnevern synes å være, er det interessant å lære (også) fra denne studien at folk på tvers av land, individuelle forskjeller og barnevernsystemer, generelt støtter barnevernets inngrep og bistand i en situasjon der et barn er i potensiell risiko.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
Disclaimer
Publications from the project reflect only the authors’ views and the funding agency is not responsible for any use that may be made of the information contained therein.
Open access
With license CC BY-NC.
Correction Statement
This article has been corrected with minor changes. These changes do not impact the academic content of the article.
Notes
1 Policy theory has two related branches: policy feedback theory (policies affects politics over time, e.g. Beland, Citation2010) and policy responsiveness theory (politicians are aware and incentivised by popular preferences for policies, e.g. Brooks & Manza, Citation2006). Both primarily regard public opinion as an independent variable that explains, or has an impact on, politicians and in turn how policy is developed, decided, and implemented.
2 For exploratory purposes, the survey also included questions about attitudes regarding well-being and family interventions. These data are not the focus of this paper.
Additional information
Funding
Notes on contributors
Marit Skivenes
Marit Skivenes has a PhD in political science at the Department of Government and the director of the Centre for Research on Discretion and Paternalism, University of Bergen, Norway. Skivenes is the PI of several international research projects on child protection system, including an ERC Consolidator grant. Skivenes has written numerous scientific works on child protection decision-making, children´s rights, migrant children, and child protection systems and broader welfare issues, as well as being an editor on the Handbook on child protection systems (2023) at Oxford University Press. Prof. Skivenes has recently led the Norwegian Governments expert committee on child protection (2021-2023) which in March 2023 delivered the report NOU 2023: 7 Trygg barndom, sikker fremtid (Safe childhood, secure future).
Asgeir Falch-Eriksen
Asgeir Falch-Eriksen is a head of academic unit at Department of Social Work, Child Welfare and Social Policy at Oslo Metropolitan University. He also holds a position as associate professor at the Department of Government at the University of Bergen. He is also co-director of Centre for Advanced Research on Integrity, Rights and Inclusion of the Child at the University of Tallinn, Estonia. He has a PhD in political science and his publications range especially across the topic fields of political theory, and the sociology of the professions. His publications are especially focusing on child protection services and human rights.
Bilal Hassan
Bilal Hassan is a postdoctoral fellow at the Department of Comparative Politics at the University of Bergen (UiB) in Norway. Hassan previously works worked as a researcher at UiB's Centre for Discretion and Paternalism, Department of Government. He holds PhD in political science from Science Po in Paris. Understanding the comparative dynamics of democratic legitimacy, including legitimacy of the child protection systems, is among his research interests.