the Newspaper published at the beginning of July a series of articles about the consequences of the supreme court's conclusions about child care, after the judgments of The european court of human rights (EDM).Willy-Tore Mørch Show more
"Many children are taken unnecessarily," says attorney Rikke Arnesen after Statistics norway (SSB) published its annual statistics on barnevernstall, and announce the number of petitions regarding compulsory measures in the Fylkesnemndene has gone down from 633 in 2015, to 338 in 2019.
This is a period of time when the Uk has been subject to severe criticism nationally and internationally, and has been sentenced at the ECHR for human rights violations in the seven barnevernssaker.
Lawyer Thea Totland follows up his colleague to confirm that for many children has been taken from their parents. She is also concerned about the use of "missing foreldreferdigheter" as justification for omsorgsovertakelse.
"Barnevernsbomba that can turn everything" writes the Newspaper in a heading, and referring to the supreme court's unanimous decision that the omsorgsovertakelse only happen in "very exceptional circumstances". This is interpreted by some barnevernsjurister that right with this raises the threshold for placing children under public care - which is both gratifying and surprising, according to the attorney Fridtjof Piene Gundersen.- Too many children taken from their parents Dagbladet Plus
There is a fierce criticism towards child welfare during the day, on behalf of the parents who have lost a child in a omsorgsovertakelse.
Apart from the Beach-Lobbensaken, no issues innklaget for human rights violations against children, although there are many examples of that child welfare authorities have not intervened where they absolutely should. All the critics, without exception, mumbles that all decisions should be to the child's best interests.
Means, for example, the decline in the number of tvangsbegjæringer from 2015 to 2019 that "many children are taken needlessly" as a lawyer Arnesen mean?
What she does not know. STATISTICS have not investigated the reasons for the decline. As a lawyer for the parents who has lost her child is the obvious example, to conclude that the decline reveals unnecessary omsorgsovertakelser.
It can just as easily be that the barnevernstjenestene around in small municipalities refuse to bring a case for Fylkesnemndene in a period of massive criticism and threats against individuals.
In that case, you may in worst case be 295 children who live under the malicious care. Some lawyers claim that the municipalities have though the gravity and to a greater extent offered guidance. It is unlikely.Turn On the LydErrorAllerede plus customer? Log into herError TRUDE AGAINST NORWAY: Kill the process when Trudes son was adopted away. Video: Siv Johanne Seglem / Asle Hansen / Dagbladet Show more
There is a great shortage of expertise in the child welfare services about the guidance, and still refuse many parents to receive guidance. This illustrates the many lawyers ' orderly place with the differences between the children the best and child's best.
We can quickly agree that it is to the child's best to grow up with their biological parents. When will decrease on the 295 omsorgsovertakelser a youngest son. But if it is this child's best that is the yardstick can the conclusion be wrong. That requires thorough study, the lawyers do not have access to, and the child's best interests may very well be to come under public care.
the Supreme court thus has declared that it must " very exceptional circumstances" to take a child out of the family, without having to say a word about what this means.
does it Apply when the child's life and health is in acute danger? One must believe it. Does it apply when the child is exposed to prolonged stress and anxiety so that the child's brain is damaged and it goes out of memory and emotional stability? One must believe it also.
Apply it when the parent does not capture the infant's signals, so that the child will be returned in the cognitive, emotional and physical development? Apply it when the parents do not respond adequately to the child's tilknytningsatferd, so that the parents cannot be established as the secure base that all children are depending on? Apply it when parents deny children health care? Apply it when the parents are not providing for the children's hygiene, and adequate nutrition?
All these examples can lead to , serious damage to the child and could lead to omsorgsovertakelse in the day, if the parents do not have the potential, the will or desire to get guidance. And all these examples is about the lack of foreldreferdigheter as a lawyer Totland don't think it's a good enough reason.
If the Supreme court believes that these examples are within the scope of the "very exceptional circumstances" raises the it is not the threshold for omsorgsovertakelse. As support I would like to MATCH the principal criticism of too little socializing after omsorgsovertakelse, a kind of Catch 22-situation if it is true that Norway routinely violate this menneskerettigheten.Aksjonerte in kindergarten: - Not been involved in similar You can submit your article and opinion piece in Dagbladet here
Want to discuss?Visit Dagbladet debate!