In the Syrstad and Slettbøs post about how necessary it is to provide independent and good assistance to parents who have been deprived of their children, does it sober, almost too sober, about this group.
There is an important argument in the context of that which is pointed out: According to Norwegian law, shall omsorgsovertakelser be temporary. Also when the location is believed to be long-lasting to parents could be in a position to make a turnaround. This shows how great importance it talked about the offer.
The support that is given in the careful abundance of abandoned parents, can not be seen isolated from what happens on the other side where the child is placed in foster care. Foster parents get settlements for the first few years, and secondly the opportunity for settlements, and all the way right to the coverage of additional expenses and assistance. The difference in resources is so pronounced that it occurs a question about the biological parents are given a real opportunity to be able to compete with the position of the foster parents is provided.
the Parents who come here are afraid. Terrified Dagbladet Plus
The force of attraction that occurs around foster homes can in no way be underestimated. Focusing around the means and measures as before were around the biological parents, has now been moved over to the fosterforeldrene. The latter also has the advantage of being “wanted” in a completely different way than biological parents, that through the whole tiltaksperioden experienced well so much so that they were a problem.
Foster parents may terminate the agreement with three months notice. They are on par with the authorities in a way biological parents, according to the law, absolutely not. This very asymmetric triangle relationship is not to the child’s best interests, and the question is whether the system close to preclude reversal. As Syrstad and Slettbø then we need more success stories. It must also apply to the reversal, if not is the assertion that there should be statutory rule, both hollow and cruel to all.
Children’s best – Norway against the world? Debate
Ask an adult “what is worst, to be put in jail or lose custody of your children?”, most will come up in both 2, 3 and maybe many more years in prison before it can be weighted against losing the care of their children. Or equivalent; that you as children should have a new set of parents who you have never met before and that biology is some you only should have knowledge of.
Arranged family relationships have ethical concerns such as arranged marriage (they occur in a similar view in which the agreement is entered into with good intentions and the parties will meet to confirm that the agreement reality), and in addition the dimension that the one party always is a children and often a small child.
to be able to handle this child developed a institusjonspsykologi that in itself is all well and good, but which in practice is upheld as an ideal that the biological parents can never compete against that, because they, by definition, are biological parents and because bereaved parents are not given enough support.
It may be objected that the decision regarding the omsorgsovertakelse the need to have much for themselves, but then it is important to be aware that rettssikkerhetsgarantiene is underdeveloped.
I am proud of the Norwegian child welfare Debate
in Order to make a quick comparison: Where the criminal has around 400 special rights and obligations because the punishment is considered as an evil, has tvisteloven just ten provisions in a separate chapter 36 that apply specifically tvangssaker.
the Courts from the legislature provided few tools, but it can also be that the courts should strengthen their legitimacy is by on your own to develop additional procedural rettssikkerhetsgarantier.
One thing is for sure, testing of these cases should be given a level of attention that strategy more with a public legal opinion that this is close to the most serious, the authorities can do against a man in Norway today.
