Entrevistas realizadas a diferentes Cooperativas del segmento dos

This section examines the legislation governing children’s welfare in Iceland and discusses the degree to which children’s international rights have been incorporated into the Icelandic legislative framework. The analysis indicates that children in the Nordic countries are conceptualised as dependent family members (Eydal and Satka,

2004). There is a strong focus in the Icelandic legislation on providing services to

support parents, and little emphasis on providing services to children in their own right. The discourses of welfare and protection are evident and although it is clear that

children over fifteen years of age are to be treated as active parties in decision-making, at least in child protection, younger children’s rights to express their views are subject to judgements about their age and maturity. In considering what is in children’s best interests, therefore, it is quite possible that decision-makers could rely upon adults’ views and fail to take account of children’s perspectives. Disabled children are conceptualised through a medical model of disability (where the problem is seen as within the child, as opposed to recognising that society is disabling, not the child) (Lewis and Kellett, 2004) and there is no reference in any of the legislation to the diversity of children’s background and experiences or to the principle of non- discrimination.

Brembeck et al. (2004) argue that there was a strong political will to incorporate children’s rights into Nordic welfare agendas. Accordingly, the Nordic countries have attained an international reputation for attending to the individual rights of children, which pre-dated the ratification of the Convention in the late 1980s. The extent of national measures varied, but ‘The child as an autonomous subject was recognised and the understanding of childhood changed in every Nordic country’ (Eydal and Satka,

2004, p.53). The Icelandic Government adopted the Convention in 1992 and the first Ombudsperson for Children was appointed in January 1995. The Ombudsperson has played an important role in promoting children’s rights to participation (Tryggvadóttir and Ingadóttir, 2007; Althing Ombudsman, 2008).

Conceptions of children and childhood in Icelandic legislation

Relevant Icelandic legislation governing social work with children in Iceland includes: the Local Authority Social Services Act (1991); the Act on the Affairs of People with Disabilities (1992); the Child Protection Act (2002); and the Act in

Respect of Children (2003). All these have subsequent amendments and the latter two Acts in particular, revised previous legislation to take account of the Convention. Local Authority Social Services Act and Act on the Affairs of People with Disabilities: adult- centred legislation

The Local Authority Social Services Act makes provision for people of all ages; for children their welfare is to be promoted by ‘securing positive developmental circumstances’ (1991, Article 1). In the implementation of the Act, workers are required to encourage ‘each individual to be responsible for himself and others, to respect his right to self-determination, and support him in his efforts at self-help’ (1991, Article 1). There are also strong statements in the Act on the importance of working in cooperation with people requesting assistance; collecting information about them is to be done in cooperation and with their approval if possible, and all decisions are to be taken in consultation. However, these statements are not in the sections about the welfare and provision for children and it is not clear that they are intended to include children. In fact the first paragraph in these sections indicates that cooperation is between adults: ‘It shall be the duty of the social services committee, in cooperation with parents, guardians and other parties responsible for the upbringing, education and health care of children and young persons, to secure their well-being and protect their interests in every respect’ (1991, Section VIII, Article 30). The sections on children and adolescents do not contain any mention of children’s rights to services, or rights to have their views taken into account, even though the Act has been amended four times since

1991, most recently in 2006. The language is consistent with discourses of welfare and focuses more on needs of adults, with emphasis on supporting parents through

assistance and day care provision. In summary, the main focus of the legislation is on the family and not children. This focus on the family was strengthened later in the

1990s with the formation of an official family policy based on the premise that the ‘family is the cornerstone of Icelandic society and the source of human values’ (Parliamentary Resolution, 1997).

The Act on the Affairs of People with Disabilities (1992) also makes provision for people of all ages. The Act makes general statements about respecting disabled people’s rights, but the main focus is on safeguarding the rights of disabled people living in care homes. The section on children focuses mainly on monitoring children for ‘symptoms’ of disability, diagnosis and treatment (1992, Section IX, Article 17). The medical model of disability (Lewis and Kellett, 2004) is dominant, along with support to parents through the provision of support families and foster homes for relief care. Child protection legislation: strengthening children’s rights

Child protection is more broadly defined in Iceland than in the UK. The objective of the Child Protection Act, 2002 is ‘to ensure that children who are living in unacceptable circumstances or children who place their health and development at risk receive the necessary help’ (2002, Section I, Article 2). The Act focuses on children and represents a significant shift from previous legislation of 1993. The Act introduced the concept of the ‘best interests’ of the child and the duty to take account of the child’s views and wishes. In addition, children’s rights to have a say in decision-making by the child protection committee and in court proceedings were strengthened, especially for children over the age of fifteen (2002, Section I, Article 4).

As explained in the introduction to the thesis, child protection committees have a responsibility for child protection duties at local level in Iceland. The committees have extensive decision-making powers including initiating and overseeing

investigation of concerns raised about children in their area, and deciding what measures, if any, shall be taken. Reports must be made and plans agreed with the consent of parents and children over the age of fifteen, if possible. There is a wide range of actions that can be taken without consent. The committee can order

placement of a child away from home for up to two months. Monitoring of the home and other measures such as school attendance, tests, treatment or therapy can also be taken without consent (2002, Section III).

Only children over the age of fifteen years are considered to be party to child protection committee proceedings. This gives them the opportunity to participate in formulating plans, the opportunity to put their views if they disagree with certain measures, and the right to become a party and have a spokesperson in legal

proceedings. Children under the age of fifteen have fewer rights. Essentially, the child under fifteen is ‘given the opportunity of expressing his/her views in cases affecting him/her, in accord with the child’s age and maturity, and the child’s views shall be fairly taken into account in resolution of the case’ (2002, Section VIII, Article 46). Nevertheless, a distinction is made for children over the age of twelve, who are always to be given the opportunity to express their views. In other words, children over the age of twelve are assumed to be of sufficient age and maturity to express their views. For children under twelve years, however, this assumption is not made, and their right to express their views is dependent on the assessment of the practitioner. The Act also provides for the child of any age to be assisted by a spokesperson in putting her view to

the child protection committee. When the committee decides to begin an investigation it must also decide whether a spokesperson should be appointed. The grounds for the appointment and the role of the spokesperson are not specified in the legislation (2002, Section VIII).

The changes introduced by the new Child Protection Act (2002) were partly in response to the Convention and broadly speaking children’s rights were strengthened in the new Act. However, it is clear that these rights are set within a developmental framework where different rights to participation are afforded according to age, with the rights of under children under fifteen to participate in decision-making being very weak.

The Act in Respect of Children (2003) deals with family law including parental duties, custody issues (residence in UK terminology) and rights of access (contact in UK terminology). The Act stipulates that parents shall consult their child before making decisions concerning their personal affairs and in line with the Convention (United Nations, 1989, Article 9) they must give more importance to the child’s views as the child grows older and matures. Children’s rights to the care of, and contact with, both parents are emphasised, with all decisions made according to what is deemed to be in the child’s best interests. The child has the right to comment on decisions made when custody or access is in dispute, but only if the child has reached ‘sufficient maturity’ and provided this will not ‘have a detrimental effect for the child or is pointless for the outcome of the case’ (Chapter VI, Article 43). A judge can hear a child’s views without the parents being present and can appoint an expert to ascertain the child’s views. Parents must be notified of the child’s view, but may not have full information or see the report. Children may, therefore, be afforded the right to give their views in

confidence, although they are dependent on the judge to decide how far their views are subsequently shared with parents. Clearly adults are the main actors in any proceedings and any child is largely in a passive position, allowed to comment, providing he or she is mature enough. It is hard to think of circumstances in which a child’s comment is pointless or how the outcome of a case can be predicted with such certainty without hearing the child’s views.

Achieving the objectives of the Convention: evaluation of Iceland

Recent reports by the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC) have welcomed the initiatives that the Icelandic State has made in the last decade to promote children’s rights to protection, services and participation (CRC,

2003, 2006). In particular, the CRC welcomed the new child protection legislation of

2002, the ratification of the Optional Protocols concerning children in armed conflict, the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography (sic), and the

development of specialist services to meet young people’s health needs. However, the CRC (2003, 2006) has also made specific recommendations that the Icelandic State:

• Address issues of racism proactively and study the situation of immigrant children in

the school system;

• Strengthen opportunities for children to express their views and to input directly into

policies that affect them;

• Strengthen its efforts to cover the needs of disabled children and analyse data on the

extent to which their rights are being met;

• Expand adolescents’ access to health services and, with their full participation, study

• Act on its admission of the need to collect and analyse data on children, including

immigrant children;

• Review its legislation with a view to ensuring that children engaged in prostitution

are not criminalised, but rather seen as victims.

These concerns were reflected, to some extent, in a four year action plan to improve the situation of children in Iceland (Parliamentary Resolution, 2007). The plan focused on:

• Financial measures to alleviate poverty;

• Support to parents through counselling and training in parenting skills; • Preventive measures to combat illegal drug and alcohol use by providing

information and preventing access;

• Developing the services to children with mental health problems, developmental disorders and chronic illness by improving collaboration both in primary health services and the specialist arrangements for diagnosis and remedial treatment;

• Measures to benefit children with behavioural problems and drug-abuse problems by expanding the variety of remedies ‘outside the institutional framework [and]

provided in the context of the family and the child’s immediate environment’;

• Measures to protect children against sexual offences with special emphasis on children who are greater risk because they are disabled or living in institutions, as well as the threat posed by child abuse images and use of the internet to groom children;

• Measures for the benefit of children of immigrants by combating prejudicial attitudes; making it easier to participate in Icelandic society but also maintain their

own cultural identity; and support for children and their parents in learning Icelandic.

These were all important responses to concerns raised by CRC reports about the application of children’s rights to services and protection in Iceland. However, it is noticeable that there was no mention of children’s participation rights and in particular, no indication of the importance of ascertaining their views on these measures, nor of their collaboration with the implementation of action plans.

Analysis

The preceding descriptions have shown that legislators and policy-makers in the international and Icelandic socio-legal context employ developmental models of

childhood that provide a conditional context for children’s agency (White, 1998; Taylor, 2004). There is no automatic right for children to participate in decision- making as children’s rights to be heard are worded in terms of capabilities and competence (Wyness, 2006). An important step in developing more child-directed practice, therefore, is the questioning of assumptions and general ideas about children in the universal models of childhood that underpin the socio-legal context of social work practice (Taylor, 2004). This involves stepping back from expert positions based on these assumptions and taking children seriously, as experts with knowledge and experience of their own circumstances (Sevenhuijsen, 1998; Smart and Neale, 1999; Smart et al., 2001; Kelly, 2005).

The next section examines the organisational context of social work practice in Iceland, highlighting key opportunities and constraints for developing more child- directed practice. Two current trends are particularly important: the bringing together of services provided by different agencies into unified centres, and the increasing

commitment to involving service users in the development of services. However, these trends involve meeting the challenge of establishing structural arrangements, without creating rigid and routinised processes that increase demands on practitioners and remain unresponsive to young people’s preferences. A crucial factor in meeting this challenge is that changes are planned and implemented in collaboration with

practitioners and young people, so that systems and services are informed by young people’s and practitioners’ knowledge and experiences.