*
25 January 2019
The
child and family centers
*
The CPS
Barnevernet needs law regulation
By
Ragnvald Bjørgaas Petersen,
medical doctor in Sandnes, Norway and in Ethiopia
• • • •
The
Norwegian version of this article was published
in the medical periodical Dagens Medisin
01/2019 ('Today's Medicine') on 18
January 2019.
It is published here with the
author's generous consent.
• • • •
In Aftenposten in 2017, a professor of law found it
troubling that families that are in touch with the CPS, are
forced by the county boards to move into family centers. At
these centers parental skills are taught, and parents are
observed, filmed and evaluated. For one third of these
families, the cases end up with removal of the children.
A family therapist working at one of these institutions,
was interviewed by the municipalities' joint organization
journal, Fontene, in October 2018: "Most do not want to be
here. They know that if they do not approve, the child can
be placed" and "Some need to get their fear under control
before we can start to work on change. For some this can
take weeks".
When families stay at family centers, it is seemingly
voluntary, based on fear, for the ones where the measure
has not been decided by the County Board. We see the same
thing in the headline on the same subject in Dagbladet 30th
of December: "The parents who come here are scared. Scared
to death."
The CPS is by definition an authoritarian institution. They
can give measures to help the family, but they can also
make decisions on emergency care orders, or demand
dissolution of the family. The duality in their mandate
which is unfortunate and can cause negative dynamics in
working with the families, I will not discuss further here.
Nevertheless, the family centers function as part of the
CPS, with the same paradoxical double-function: They are
supposed to help, while at the same time considering if the
child should be removed from the parents and be placed with
others.
From a general perspective, trust is a must for a fruitful
therapeutical relation. Teaching and observation will be of
limited value, when it is performed under circumstances
where the client may feel negative motivation of fear and
coercion. How appropriate is it for society to decide upon
the future of families, based on surveilance done in
environments where the parents can feel disempowered and
their whole life threatened?
High ethical awareness and respect for the autonomy of the
family should be the girder of all CPS work, and will
always be of benefit to the children. Even if the CPS is in
need of information, this must never compromise basic norms
and values.
The politicians should now evaluate the activities at the
child and family centers. The laws should be revised, to
make sure that all stays at these centers happen
voluntarily, based on positive motivation and without the
families having to make desperate choices beforehand. These
institutions should cultivate the help-function, and be a
service accessible to the users. Evaluations should
exclusively be used as a tool for teaching of parents, and
never be allowed as evidence for care orders.
If family centers can not be re-organized in this way, the
authorities need to evaluate to which extent these
institutions should be part of a reformed and modern
CPS-system.
**
*