Designing Networks of Child Protection in the Local Authority: the European Experiences.

1. Designing Networks of Child Protection in the Local Authority: the European Experiences. Agapi Kandylaki Ass. Professor Dept of Social Administration Democritus University of Thrace

2. Key words and key issues • Local - comparative presentations • Networks • Solidarity – subsidiarity • Child welfare –child protection • Poverty- child abuse???? • Keep the family together? How? When? • Foster Families- emergency –Short term- longer term? • Childrens’ Homes

3. Why on a local level • On a local level problems can be dealt better and decisions taken can be closer to the citizen’s needs • Measures taken on a local level aim to develop the already existing institutions and services. • More flexible, more focused, less bureaucracy

4. What is a network ?? • Networks attempt to promote interaction and co-operation between several institutions and services and among several groups in a community. According to Tracy (2002) social networks are mechanisms through which social support projects can operate. Networks refer to the structure and interrelation between a number of individuals and groups with which professionals and service users co-operate in order to get support. • Networks analysis as a methodology contributes to the understanding, studying and dealing with social problems through a holiistic perspective which permits several perspectives • Networks underline the importance of mapping services and encouraging co-operation between national services, local services and NGOs in a Local Authority.

5. Examples • Central Europe • UK • Southern Europe----- Greece

6. Central Europe • Germany Netherlands Belgium • Subsidiarity, an important principle of political life. Strongly influenced by the catholic social teaching which in turn has played a powerful shaping role in social life in many continental states. • It means that whatever smaller and more localized institutions or groups can on their own must not be removed by a higher level of competence or by the power of the state. Responsibility and decision making should rest with the people most directly involved. The state at the same time should support local or regional institutions in developing strong social networks and in fact this is an obligation on the German state

7. Welfare pluralism Subsidiarity encourages pluralism in welfare Autonomy for social institutions, Greater involvement of the independent sector Less central government control/management of s.w. practice

8. Solidarity and the family • Solidarity--- mutuality,reciprocity of obligations and duties, social responsibility, social cohesion • Subsidiarity- hierarchically ordered solidarity. • Family is therefore not seen as a private domain which should be free but rather it is seen as a foundation of society and social solidarity, and a proper object of social concern support and welfare (mostly clearly in France family-model of political life- essential building block of a strong republic)

9. Child welfare- child protection • Child welfare is the set of public and private agencies that provide a whole range of social services for children and their families. • Child welfare –residential services foster care- foster familiew/adoption, services to children living in their homes day care, parents’ aid, counselling, subsidies…. • Child protection is considered to concentrate to much narrower protection and care of homeless, dependent and neglected and absued children

10. Belgian –Flemish system • The provision of Belgian social services is based on the subsidiarity principle. There are many small voluntary organizations offering a range of help and a rather limited generic local social services system The Committee for special Youth Assistance (set up by Law in 1985) problematic educational- upbringing situation. Concern about general health, welfare and development of the child and youth. Not a service for the courts. Institutionalization of Prevention and voluntary working so that it is a structural part of their work Mediation committee in each judicial area consisting of six members appointed by the government (people with some specialist knowledge of problematic educational/upbringing situations. They meet twice a month. Mediate between social workers and families. –act as neutral buffer zone –parents, children and professionals can ask help . This is a very important aspect of the committee’s role Mediation committee helps to reproduce solidarity and connectedness

11. Sweden • There is emphasis on a social and family policy model emphasizing on the care of children and families. Preventing poverty • Keep the family unified (based on the social solidarity principle) is important • Emphasis on prevention • Responding to families’ needs is a citizen’s right • Risk assessment is important for intervention • Self help projects between parents(Contact Persons- Contact Families) • Private services for child protection (childrens’ homes and family therapy or individual therapy paid by Local Authorities • Social Services in the Local Authorities but there is a central co-ordination by the State and Child Protection of Welfare laws are introduced by the State

12. Britain • Social services in the local authorities- close co-operation woith the police • Special domain dealing with educational problems and social work at schools • Health Visitors NHS • National and Local NGOs contracts with the Local Authorities for the provision of family services or children homes or assessment centres • Very few self help projects offered to parents • Social Services pay for private therapy costs • NGOs Children’s Homes, Foster Family organisations Hostels • Family Therapy and Assessment centres (NGO)- • Committees • Case Manager Responsible to follow the progress , manage the case assess etc Write the assessment report • Child Protection Conferences

13. Child Protection Conferences • Case analysis in co-operation with the unit manager • There is an effort although not always fruitful for the family to participate in the conference (unless serious reasons suggest other wise) • The conference decides if the child is at risk in at least 6 meetings • Referral to the Court. The social worker is responsible for the referral and he presents it to the court in presence of the family and their lawyer

14. Differences between the Child Conference and the mediation committee in Belgium • Conference – administrative body while mediation committee – social institution • Conference membership is professional rather than ‘lay’ • Decision making rather than mediation or problem solving • Conf. not accessible to families formed on an ad hoc , case by case basis with a changing membership • Mediation committee is a public body and has an organic link to the community • Although the conference is a multidisciplinary meeting it is managed mainly by social workers and this further restricts its potential for public, social and professional accountability(Hetherington et al, 1997)

15. Germany • Subsidiarity- Catholic Church influence- Local organizations NGOs, informal networks of care • Families seek help in NGOs (Protestant Church- Caritas)) • NGOs have the responsibility to intervene and link with networks in the ciommunity(education, therapy centres, assessement centres, Childrens’ Homes, etc • In cases of abuse special servicesKinderschutzdienst , Child protection services offer telephone help, counselling, family therapy • Services #for young people Offer services to familes and children, care for children and single parent families, fostering and adoption • Committee for young people responsible for the development of prevention projects and support to families and youths projects. • Members of the Committee are Voluntary organizations, Education Services, teachers representatives from immigrants’ communities or people who have worked with these communities, church representatives, social workers from the Youth Services

16. Greece • CARE • -GOVERNMENTAL LEVEL • - REGIONAL LEVEL • LOCAL AUTHORITIES • ROLE OF THE FAMILY IN SOUTHERN EUROPE • Sometimes an extra burden

17. FAMILY CARE INSTITUTIONS • STATE • NGO • SEMI PRIVATE • PIKPA • NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF CARE • ‘INSTITUTE MITERA’ • 1998. NATIONAL ORGANIZATION OF SOCIAL CARE • FOSTER CARE SUPERVIZED BY THE MINISTRY OF HEALTH • 2003 PIKPA REGIONAL SYSTEM • FAMILY CENTRES - LOCAL AUTHORITIES • MITERA – INDEPENDENT

18. FOSTER CARE • INTRODUCED BY LAW • 1992, 1996, 1998 • JUNE 2000 631 CHILDREN IN FOSTER CARE, 388 IN ATTICA • EKAKB NATIONAL CENTRE OF EMERGENT SOCIAL ASSISTANCE • (IMPLEMENTED BY LAW 13/2646/1996) • CO-ORDINATION OF THE NETWORK OF SERVICES OFFERING SOCIAL SUPPORT TO INDIVIDUALS FAMILIES AND POPULATION WHO ARE IN A STATE OF EMERGENT NEED • SERVICES ARE OFFERED TO THOSE WHO NEED EMERGENT SOCIAL INTERVENTION • TEMPORARY HOUSING AND FOOD • INFORMATION ON WELFARE ISSUES • COUNSELLING SUPPORT (INDIV. GROUP, COMMUNITY LEVEL) • CO-ORDINATION AND APPLICATION OF PROGRAMMES ON SOCIAL SOLIDARITY, VOLUNTARISM, TO DEAL WITH EMERGENT NEEDS • BRIEF PSYCHOLOGICAL SUPPORT • CHILDREN’S OMBUTSMAN- TO PROMOTE SENSITIZATION ON CHILDREN’ RIGHTS ON CHILD ABUSE, EXPLOITATION AND NEGLECT

19. Questions for discussion • Compare and contrast legal frameworks, social policies and social workers responsibilities and the difficulties the latter may face in supporting survivors of family violence and abuse in your countries • Discuss Child welfare provisions in your countries • Are existing networks between services in your countries successful or not

20. Greece • (Legislations 1999-2003) ΕΟΚΦ- ΠΕΣΥΠ- DYPE • ΚΔΑΥ – ( Θεσμικοί περιορισμοί) – Σχολεία Centres for the Assessment of Educational Needs- ministry of Education • Ministry of Justice Probation Service for children and youths • Welfare Services - Prefectures • Social Services in Hospitals • Social Services in the Local Authority • Multidisciplinary co-operations not always common • Child –Psychiatry Centres • Lack of supervision and support to professionals- they often work on their own)

21. Differences between prefectures ( Greece is divided into the Centre , Northern Greece, the islands, and Crete • There is a need to develop foster families • Sensitization of Self Help between parents- informal networks of care • Develop more interagency co-operation (institutionalization of interagency co-operation • The lack of a severely organized regulatory body for child protection services (apart from Court ) is an advantage as it encourages flexibility, but bhere is a need to develop sustainable interservice networks between services, education,etc) • There is a possibility and this is often the case that there is a long term support and co-operation with families εποπτεια