Book contents
- Frontamtter
- Dedication
- Contents
- List of Figures and Tables
- About the Author
- Acknowledgements
- 1 Introduction
- 2 Children’s Participation as Contested Practice
- 3 Non-Participation Triggers
- 4 Participation Triggers
- 5 Doing Participation
- 6 Youth Citizens
- 7 Protecting Children, Creating Citizens
- Appendix 1 Research Methods
- Appendix 2 Discussion Questions
- Notes
- References
- Index
4 - Participation Triggers
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 18 March 2021
- Frontamtter
- Dedication
- Contents
- List of Figures and Tables
- About the Author
- Acknowledgements
- 1 Introduction
- 2 Children’s Participation as Contested Practice
- 3 Non-Participation Triggers
- 4 Participation Triggers
- 5 Doing Participation
- 6 Youth Citizens
- 7 Protecting Children, Creating Citizens
- Appendix 1 Research Methods
- Appendix 2 Discussion Questions
- Notes
- References
- Index
Summary
This chapter examines which individual and contextual factors mattered to the study participants in situations when they heard children and took their statements or opinions and wishes seriously. These factors are called ‘participation triggers’ here. Sixty-seven workers (28 in Norway and 39 in California) were asked to describe a case in which a child's opinion mattered “a lot” to their decision-making. I analyzed the responses of workers who investigated reports of child abuse and neglect, and those who had provided or were providing ongoing services to children and families. The study participants could choose any situation they wanted to describe as the question was open-ended. In some cases, the participants were prompted to elaborate on what exactly it was that led them to believe that the child's opinion was significant in the case they were describing. That way I learned about the factors in actual cases.
Three of the study participants, two in Norway and one in California, described situations that involved driving a car, metaphorically and/or literally, either together as co-drivers with children or in a convoy. The participants’ use of this imagery is revealing. Driving together suggests two things: first, both drivers can decide about the direction in which the vehicle is moving, a process that is facilitated by the codrivers talking with each other about where they would like to head next, when to take a break, and so on. Second, it indicates that there are two individuals in the vehicle who are old enough and skilled enough to drive. The three examples of co-driving situations involved older teens and illustrated that “co-driving” (read: co-deciding) was affected by the child's age and ability to communicate their wishes clearly, convincingly and credibly. They also involved mutual trust and the worker's commitment to constant communication, which took effort and time. This finding resonates with one of the arguments in prior literature discussed in Chapter 2: a respectful relationship between children and caseworkers, established through informationgiving and gathering, is a crucial building block towards children's genuine participation.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Protecting Children, Creating CitizensParticipatory Child Protection Practice in Norway and the United States, pp. 63 - 86Publisher: Bristol University PressPrint publication year: 2020