In depth: A child’s participation must influence the whole case
Updated: Oct 14
Written by Tanyah Cain, special educator with a master’s degree in psychosocial learning difficulties, Cain MindSYNC.
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.
An in-depth professional discussion in the series on children and child welfare.
When one conversation is not enough
A child’s participation should be traceable from the information they receive, through conversations, to the reasons for a decision. A record saying that the child was asked does not show whether they understood the question or learned what their answer meant. This article considers participation as a continuing process.
The dilemma is real: a child may want something adults consider unsafe. Their views need serious consideration while adults retain responsibility for protection. Good participation requires listening, inquiry and an understandable explanation of the decision. The right applies throughout the case. [3]
AI-generated illustration. The image does not depict a real event.
What research shows and leaves uncertain
FHI’s 2020 mapping review included 77 studies, mostly qualitative. Only one examined the effects of participation. The review provides substantial material on experiences and dilemmas but limited evidence that a particular conversation method improves long-term outcomes. [1]
In 2024, FHI combined 27 studies with interviews involving 64 people. Adapted communication, meaningful influence and documentation were among the prioritised challenges. These identify areas for improvement rather than a representative estimate of how often participation fails in Norwegian cases today. [2]
Children’s words and adult interpretations
Consider a fictional example. A young person says: ‘I do not want visits in this room.’ The record describes this as not wanting contact. A statement about a setting has become a conclusion about a relationship. The adult should explore whether the room feels unsafe, impersonal or connected to an earlier event.
A reviewable account distinguishes the child’s words, the circumstances and the adult’s interpretation. Children should be able to qualify earlier statements. A change of view may provide information and should not automatically be interpreted as unreliability or influence.
When protection and choice pull in different directions
Adults may properly decide differently from the child’s wishes. They should explain the risk, competing considerations and aspects of implementation the child can still influence. Simply invoking ‘best interests’ makes it hard to understand how the child’s particular view was considered.
Repeated questions can also be burdensome. Participation is not a duty to repeat everything to every adult. A practical aim is to use existing information responsibly, ask what the child wants to expand on and offer breaks, support and different ways to communicate.
A proposed working process
Before a conversation, clarify its purpose, information-sharing and what the child can influence. During it, check understanding and avoid questions that suggest a desired answer. Afterwards, explain what was understood, what remains unclear and when feedback will follow.
For important decisions, I recommend documenting three questions: What did the child express? How was this explored and weighed? How was the outcome explained to them? This is a professional recommendation, not a validated scoring model. Ask the child whether the explanation was understandable.
Further research on lived experience
Research should follow children over time to examine whether information, support and feedback connect. Children communicating in ways other than a standard conversation deserve particular attention. FHI identifies gaps concerning young children, disabilities and minority backgrounds. [2]
Organisations’ accounts can suggest questions for research. They should be described as experiences of people who contacted the organisation, with recruitment explained. Strong accounts may illuminate serious events without establishing their prevalence across child welfare.
Evidence and scope
This is a professional discussion of selected sources, not a systematic literature review. Research descriptions use available abstracts and verified publication pages. Public guidance was checked on 13 October 2026. Qualitative findings illuminate experience without automatically establishing prevalence or causation. Practice proposals and fictional examples are a professional synthesis without established effect sizes. No new FvsB data were analysed.
Comments