Norwegian child protection is out of control

Opinion piece by Fridtjof Piene Gundersen brought in Norwegian "Dagbladet" on september 16, 2019 translated in to English by google and Mikkel Meinike Nielsen

Link to original post

Norwegian Child Welfare is out of control

This is also a judgment of Norway's law system.

PUBLISHED SEPTEMBER 16, 2019 AT 14.32

Fridtjof Piene Gundersen, Attorney, The Child Advocates

On Tuesday, something happened that will have far greater consequences for Norwegian children than the municipal elections. The European Court of Human Rights (EMD) convicted Norway of a serious human rights violation. It happened in the grand chamber, which is used only in a few important matters of great principle importance.

Norway was fielded for having forcibly adopted Trude Strand Lobbens son. 13 out of 17 judges felt that the forced adoption violated the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).

ECHR has made a judgment on Norwegian child welfare. It is also a judgment of Norway's court system. When Strand Lobbens son was forcibly adopted, it was because she had been deprived of care for her son a few years earlier. The tragic care takeover case is the breakthrough and a clear assault. Even more tragic is that it is also a typical Norwegian child welfare case.

In a short time, Norway has gone from being a beacon for human rights to gaining a reputation. Strand Lobbens case is one of 26 Norwegian child welfare cases currently under consideration in ECHR. After the conviction, it is likely that Norway will be convicted in many of these cases. That all cases concern one administrative area (child welfare) is exceptional. Only Russia and Turkey can point to similar spotlight in the ECHR. But the difference in population figures means that Norway today stands as the clear winner of the class for the number of possible human rights violations.

It is a quiet disaster that has destroyed many Norwegian families. The victims are forgotten, while government and politicians live in a bubble - disconnected from a brutal reality. The media has also neglected its role, it is a long tradition in the Norwegian press not to write about child welfare. The disaster is actively being covered by the child administration, for example, expressed by Bufdir director Mari Trommald's insistence that Norwegian child welfare is good. The Ombudsman for Children expresses that - from her experience as a judge - she does not see any problems related to the courts' handling of child welfare cases.

The Supreme Court is uninterested in these cases: Only a few of the child welfare cases in the ECHR have been dealt with by the Supreme Court. In other words, the nation's supreme court abdicated in cases where children's lives and futures are decided (and at the same time breached their duty under the ECHR to try human rights violations nationally).

How did we get here? The first answer is Ideology: In Western Europe, a so-called child-centric perspective has had an impact. This means that the rights of the child are largely seen in isolation from the family. Authorities and so-called professionals are given a considerable ability to understand and determine what is best for the child, often at the expense of the assessment of those who know the child best, the parents. These assessments are believed to be science-based.

Our experience as child advocates, on the other hand, is that subjective views are often presented as method- and fact-based conclusions. Child Welfare enters into child families and performs strange microanalyses of eye contact, interaction, connection and parenting abilities. The risk of hypothetical findings is imminent when working in this way. The "findings" that form the basis of their assessments are in reality impossible for a court to review.

The parents don't really have a say. If the psychologists find that it is best for the child to be moved from the parents, the threshold for taking care is low.

The second answer is employees: There are many skilled employees in Norwegian child welfare. Nevertheless, it is a poorly paid women's profession with a cheap education. Too many child welfare workers lack the prerequisites to exercise the power they are given.

In many cases, parents are more resourceful and reflective than child welfare workers. Often, the caseworker registers this and compensates through the depreciation of the parents. The parents' interaction with the child welfare then consists in trying not to tread on their toes.

The third answer is organization: Norwegian child welfare is spread across our many municipalities and these, with differences in economy and population, are responsible for each child welfare service. This has resulted in appalling quality differences.

On this matter, Norway has shown greater responsibility for animals than for children. When they realized that the municipal animal welfare committees were not meeting their goals, state regional offices were established under the Food Safety Authority. The fact that child welfare is no longer organized under a government agency constitutes a structural failure of the authorities towards Norwegian children.

The role of the child welfare service as both helper and executioner is almost impossible and makes it very challenging to build trust and cooperation. In our opinion, child welfare should be divided into auxiliary agency (which may be municipal) and a state "prosecution" agency, which can professionally suspect suspicion of inadequate care.

The fourth answer is resources: A well-functioning, high-quality child welfare service requires that working in child welfare is attractive and prestigious. This requires higher wages and possibly gender quotas to create a better gender balance. With increased salary and prestige, higher education requirements can also be set.

The fifth answer is the number of emergency decisions . This figure is extremely high in Norway, and the decisions are made on a very slim basis. Emergency decisions almost automatically lead to the taking of care. About 80 percent of the care transfer cases start with an emergency decision. Some child welfare services work well with this problem and have planned to reduce the number of emergency decisions and have succeeded. Based on these experiences, national measures should be implemented to drastically reduce the number of emergency decisions.

Norwegian Child Welfare is out of control. In reality, it is an uncontrolled state in the state, where the coincidence prevails. A family that comes under the spotlight of child welfare today has little protection in Norway. If it is a good social worker handling the case, it is going well. If not, anything can happen.