Search Results

The aim of this chapter is to examine the Norwegian approach to review and revise errors in the child protection system. Through the last three decades of public discourse, children in Norway have increasingly become identified as independent subjects, and in September 2017, the Norwegian government introduced legislation that gave children the legal right to protection through an amendment of the existing Child Welfare Act of 1992 (Prop. 169 L (2016–2017). Despite being ranked highly in international comparisons, the Norwegian child protection system is harshly criticized. In recent years (2015 and 2016), outrages have been highlighted through both social and traditional media, and internationally. The Norwegian term for child protection – barnevernet has become a synonym for a draconian system that steals children from their parents. The uproar and the critique came from citizens and civil society organizations, various public agencies, private persons and organizations. Auditing and oversight agencies are used to scrutinize the practices, and to follow up on errors and mistakes but there is little research on how this oversight operates, how agencies and local authorities respond to feedback, and how the day-to-day practices on correcting errors and improving practice are attended to in agencies and organizations. Based on policy documents, audit and oversight reports, legislation and key informant interviews, this chapter examines the overarching Norwegian approach to review and revise errors and mistakes through audit and oversight bodies, and discusses the strengths and weaknesses with this approach.

This chapter picks up on the fact that agencies are increasingly being required to undertake assessments of community needs and resources. It discusses the range of methods and tools available for carrying out community audits and profiles, and illustrates good practice through two case studies — Getting to Know Your Community, based in Leeds and the East African Women's Project, in Sheffield.

This chapter revisits the use of an ethical audit framework developed by Sumsion to scaffold a preliminary mapping and analysis of some of the economic, social and political issues that emerged in Australia with the rapid growth of the corporate childcare provider, ABC Learning during the period 2001-05. Using the lenses of goals, obligations and dispositions as developed by Cribb and Ball (2005), the audit framework is used to examine whether the corporatisation of Australian early childhood care – that is, the rapid expansion and escalating market share of childcare services operated and / or owned by public companies listed on the stock exchange – was in the public interest. It extends the mapping and analysis through to the period 2006 – 2009, when ABC Learning continued domestic expansion and unprecedented international growth to become the largest global childcare corporation, ending with its dramatic collapse in 2008. For Australia, in particular, therefore, the first decade of the 21st century constituted a radical ‘national experiment’ in corporatised early childhood education and care. This chapter undertakes a retrospective ethical audit of that radical experiment. The chapter concludes with reflections on some of the many questions prompted by the rise and fall of ABC Learning.