A Child’s Voice in Child Welfare: Participation Beyond a Meeting
Updated: Oct 14
Written by Tanyah Cain, Cain MindSYNC, in collaboration with Folket vs. Barnevernet.
Purpose and position: This article argues for a substantial need for research into lived experience. Research gaps must prompt closer scrutiny of child welfare practice; they must not be used to dismiss children’s and parents’ accounts. Intrusive decisions and substantial resource use demand better knowledge about the decision-making basis, adapted support and actual outcomes. Experiences shared with FvsB help formulate questions to investigate; they are not presented as representative prevalence estimates.
The practical question is where children and families experience gaps between assessment, promised support and the help actually delivered. We need to examine relevant alternative explanations, suitable adaptations and whether intervention changes life for the better.
At the heart of it
AI-generated illustration. The image does not depict a real event.
Children should receive understandable information, be listened to, and be able to see how their views affect a case. Participation is a process, not a single question at a meeting.
Why does it matter?
Children may know important things about their everyday lives that adults do not see. When they can speak safely and in a way suited to their age, language, and situation, decision-makers may gain a better-informed picture. At the same time, a child should not be made responsible for deciding the case or protecting adults. A Norwegian evidence review found that children’s participation is shaped by their relationship with the social worker, the information they receive, how conversations are conducted, and whether their views appear in the assessment. A later review also describes the risk of participation becoming formal: a child is asked, but never learns what happened to their answer. These reviews describe challenges and opportunities; they are not estimates of how often every service succeeds or fails.
What can good practice look like?
Before a conversation, explain why it is happening, who may hear what the child says, and what choices exist. Use open questions, allow pauses, and check understanding. Afterwards, explain in age-appropriate language what was considered and why. A practical question for parents and professionals is: Can we show what the child said, how it was understood, and how it affected the decision?
Evidence note
Norwegian reviews provide relevant but mixed evidence. They support the importance of clear information, relationships, and feedback; they do not by themselves prove the effect of any single interview method.
Comments