Catálogo de publicaciones - libros

The child’s right to information is part of the child’s fundamental human right of participation and access to justice according to the CRC. The child’s right to information is also stated in the Swedish national guidelines for Barnahus and in Swedish national law. The child´s right to information is, however, connected to both legal dilemmas and dilemmas in practice. In this chapter, we discuss children’s right to participation from a child rights perspective in a criminal investigation in Barnahus.

According to Swedish law, a ‘Special Representative for Children’ is to be appointed for a child victim, where a crime against the child is suspected which may carry a prison sentence, and where the child’s guardian (i.e. normally the parent) is the suspect, or where a guardian may, as a result of his or her relationship to the suspect, not protect the rights of the child. In this chapter, I analyse the act and the role(s) of the special representative for children in the context of Swedish Barnahus. The “child focus” in Barnahus is explored from a rights-based perspective. The potential of the child’s independent legal representative is highlighted, inter alia in having a close and thorough view of the child’s needs and wishes.

Barnahus collaboration spans different regulatory fields and brings together conflicting logics, creating an institutional tension between justice and welfare. In this chapter, collaboration in Swedish Barnahus is analysed in a critical manner, drawing on institutional theory and a three-dimensional concept of power. The complex institutional power dynamics evolving in Barnahus collaboration are illustrated, and subsequently how the tension between justice and welfare is negotiated and balanced. A central conclusion is the identified process of ‘juridification’ as an institutional power effect. Since multi-agency collaboration often exerts a cognitive power that builds on consensus, the framework presented in this chapter—revealing underlying conflicts of interests and power imbalances—is very important for understanding Barnahus collaboration, as well as other similar contexts of collaboration and integrated services.

This chapter explores whether and how juridification manifests in the Norwegian Barnahus model using empirical results concerning juridification in the Swedish Barnahus model as a point of reference. Factors that may stimulate or constrain processes of juridification are discussed. The analyses are based on data from the evaluation of Norwegian Barnahus in 2012 and Barnahus data from 2015 to 2016. The analyses of Swedish Barnahus found that child welfare workers were influenced the most by the penal perspective. Evaluation of the Norwegian model indicated that role conflicts were not a problem for the professionals involved. Differences in the construction and implementation of the Barnahus models may explain differences in juridification; however, recent changes in Norwegian legislation regarding child investigative interviews and policy processes suggest that juridification is also present in the Norwegian Barnahus model.

The chapter studies how the establishment of Barnahus in Denmark in 2013 has affected the ability of child welfare case workers to work holistically with abused children. The study presents a theoretical understanding of holistic social work and uses mixed methods to collect data from child welfare case workers within the vicinity of one Barnahus. The conclusion of the study is multifaceted because while the multidisciplinary approach of the Barnahus reflects the essence of a holistic approach, the specific legislation and organisation of the Barnahus represents a more reductionist perspective on social work. The main conclusion of the study is that Barnahus and the child welfare services embrace different holistic approaches to abused children.

The key purpose of this chapter is to identify challenges in terms of reinterpreting the Barnahus model to accommodate adult victims of domestic violence. The analysis is based on data from the first part of an ongoing process evaluation of the November project in Oslo, Norway, which is set in a police station and aspires to be a Barnahus for adults. Drawing on both the Norwegian Barnahus model and a Swedish multi-agency model for adult and child victims of domestic violence, this project constitutes a complex translation process. As two related but disparate source models are brought together and translated across both national borders and age divides, there should be an acute awareness of the particular recipient context, especially in terms of existing collaborative structures and unmet needs. The analysis is relevant for countries that are considering the implementation of the Nordic Barnahus model because it highlights the importance of a detailed analysis of the local institutional landscape.

A key message from this chapter—and the book as such—is that the Nordic Barnahus model is a step in the right direction in terms of meeting victimised children’s needs and legal rights, and that it could be recommended as a promising practice for other countries. At the same time, it is not a quick fix. In light of the book contributions, this chapter discusses the potentials and challenges of the Barnahus model in the Nordic context and beyond. It highlights the importance of the Nordic welfare state context for the implementation of the model and discusses the different modes of governance that have developed around it. The chapter further describes how the implementation of the Barnahus model has led to the development of a new institutional field—the Barnahus field—and a corresponding field of multidisciplinary research.