Abstract
Over the past 20 years, kinship care placement has been prioritised by governments in a number of Western countries, including Denmark, but unlike countries such as Australia and New Zealand, the Scandinavian countries, with the exception of Norway, have not significantly increased the number of such cases. The focus in this study is on field worker behaviour, placement discourses and the link to good examples of kinship care. Our assumption is that both the number and quality of kinship care placements depend on the social workers, their managers and organisations, because kinship care has been given high political priority, and with regard to most of the kinship care placements in our study, the families themselves have taken the initiative. This case study identifies and discusses the practice of social workers, their behaviour in the field, in order to address the challenges, values and discourses that may stand in the way of increasing the number of kinship care placements. We conclude that it is difficult for social workers to enter into the emotional space of families, and that special discourses—for example, children in need of therapeutic care, or that kinship care families must live up to the same standards as professional foster families—mean that family network placements are not selected. Secondly, the fact that family networks are not systematically involved in the decision-making processes concerning placements means that they are deselected, since the matching process leaves no time for such involvement.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data Availability
Due to the nature of this research, participants of this study did not agree for their data to be shared publicly, so supporting data is not available.
References
Andersen, I. (1990). Valg af organisationssociologiske metoder: Et kombinationsperspektiv. Frederiksberg: Samfundslitteratur.
Brodkin, E. Z. (2013). Street-level organizations and the welfare state. In E. Z. Brodkin & G. Marston (Eds.), Work and the welfare state: Street-level organizations and workfare politics. Copenhagen: Djøf Publishing.
Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative and mixed methods approaches. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Connolly, M., Kiraly, M., McCrae, L., & Mitchell, G. (2016). A kinship care practice framework: Using a life course approach. British Journal of Social Work. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bcw041.
Fairclough, N. (1992). Discourse and social change. PolityPress.
Holtan, A., Thørnblad, R., & Skoglund, J. (2020). Slektsfosterhjem – Mellom barnevern og familie. Gyldendal.
Kanisha, L., & Wu, Q. (2016). Kinship care and service utilization: A review of predisposing, enabling, and need factors. Children and Youth Services Review, 61, 201–210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2015.12.014.
Linderot, S. (2006). Att placera eller inte placera i släktinghem, det är frågan. En studie kring familjehemsplaceringar – lagstiftning, attityder och handläggning inom socialtjänsten. Licentiatuppsats, Socialhögskolan, Lunds Universitet
Linderot, S. (2020). Av kärlek och plikt: Att bli familjehem till ett barnbarn, syskon eller syskonbarn. Lund: Lunds universitet.
Lipsky, M. (2010). Street-level bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the individual in public services. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Lov om ændring af lov om social service og lov om retssikkerhed og administration på det sociale område, LOV nr 1442 of 22/12/2004.
Lov om ændring af lov om social service, lov om retssikkerhed og administration på det sociale område og forældreansvarsloven, LOV of 628 af 11/06/2010.
Mehlbye, J., Bonfils, I. S., & Andersen, K. R. (2011). Netværksanbringelser—Praksis og erfaringer i tre nordiske lande. New York: AKF Forlaget.
Moldestad, B. (2003). Slektsplassering før og nå. Norges barnevern nr, 4, 32–35.
O’Higgins, A., Sebba, J., & Gardner, F. (2017). What are the factors associated with educational achievement for children in kinship or foster care: A systematic review. Children and Youth Services Review, 79, 198–220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2017.06.004.
Ponnert, L. (2016). Emotional kinship care and neutral non-kinship care—the struggle between discourses. Child & Family Social Work, 22(2), 1084–1093. https://doi.org/10.1111/cfs.12328.
Rasmussen, B., & Jæger, S. (2019). Netværksinddragelse og familierådslagning. Kolding: UC SYD.
Rasmussen, B., & Sandgaard, A. (2018). Familierådslagning i Esbjerg Kommune. Kolding: UC SYD.
Rasmussen, B., & Sandgaard, A. (2019). Børnefokus, barnets perspektiv og børneperspektiver i familierådslagning. Kolding: UC SYD.
Rasmussen, B., Søbjerg, L., Jæger, S., & Rasmussen, M. (2020). Netværksanbringelser—ET uforløst potentiale. Uden for nummer, 20(40), 14–23.
Servicestyrelsen. (2011). Håndbog om Barnets reform. Odense: Servicestyrelsen.
Sundt, H. (2012). Slektsfosterhjem i Norden—opplæring og oppfølgning. Copperopolis: NOFCA.
Vinnerljung, B. (1993). Släktningsplaceringer i fosterbarnsvården. Socionomen, 6(2), 3–10.
Washington, T., Wrenn, A., Kaye, H., Priester, M. A., Colombo, G., Carter, K., ... Coakley, T. (2018). Psychosocial factors and behavioral health outcomes among children in Foster and Kinship care: A systematic review. Children and Youth Services Review, 90, 118–133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2018.04.030.
Winokur, M., Holtan, A., & Valentine, D. (2007). Kinship care for the safety, permanency, and well-being of children removed from the home for maltreatment. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD006546.
Winokur, M., Holtan, A., & Valentine, D. (2009). Kinship care for the safety, permanency, and well-being of children removed from the home for maltreatment. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD006546.pub2.
Winokur, M., Holtan, A., & Batchelder, K. (2014). Systematic review of kinship care effects on safety, permanency, and well-being outcomes. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1002/1451858.CD006546.pub3.
Winokur, M., Holtan, A., & Batchelder, K. E. (2018). Systematic review of kinship care effects on safety, permanency, and well-being outcomes. Research on Social Work Practice, 28(1), 19–32. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049731515620843.
Funding
The research was funded by the University College South Denmark.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors report no conflicts of interest.
Ethical Approval
The respondents gave their consent to the study and the researcher has complied with UCSYD research ethics.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Rasmussen, B.M., Jæger, S. The Emotional and Other Barriers to Kinship Care in Denmark: A Case Study in Two Danish Municipalities. Child Adolesc Soc Work J 38, 201–209 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10560-021-00743-2
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10560-021-00743-2