Article Information

BIOLOGICAL PARENTS OF CHILDREN IN ALTERNATIVE CARE IN THE DISCOURSES OF CHILD WELFARE PROFESSIONALS

Maija Jäppinen (E-mail: maija.jappinen@helsinki.fi)

University of Helsinki, Finland

Citation: Jäppinen M. Krovnyye roditeli detey, izyatykh iz sem'i, v diskurse sotrudnikov organov zashchity detey [Biological parents of children in alternative care in the discourses of child welfare professionals]. Zhurnal sotsiologii i sotsialnoy antropologii [The Journal of Sociology and Social Anthropology], 21(3): 93–114 (in Russian). https://doi.org/10.31119/jssa.2018.21.3.5

Full Text (PDF)

Abstract. The child welfare reform in Russia heads at deinstitutionalizing the old system of children’s homes, developing family foster care, and preventive work with families. Until now, the main accent of the reform has been on foster families. Work with biological parents has remained in the margins of both policy reforms and academic research. This discourse-analytical study focuses on biological parents of children, who have been placed into institutions or foster families, and their role on the life of their children. What kind of discourses do child welfare professionals use when talking about these parents and their parenthood? What kind of roles can these parents have in the lives of their children? The analysis builds on 20 semi-structured interviews conducted in Nizhni Novgorod region in 2015–2016. In the analysis, four main discourses were found: (1) discourse of lost parenthood, (2) discourse of biological parents as a threat to child’s adaptation, (3) discourse of neglected parental responsibilities, and (4) discourse of parents in need of support. Ways of enhancing biological parents’ participation in the lives of children in out-of-home care are discussed in the end of the article. Parenthood can be precious even in a situation, when child cannot live at home with the biological parents.

Keywords: child welfare, deinstitutionalisation, alternative care, biological parents, parenthood, discourse analysis

Acknowledgements: The project “A Child’s Right to a Family — Deinstitutionalisation of Child Welfare in Putin’s Russia” has received funding from the University of Helsinki, Aleksanteri Institute, and Kone Foundation. The author also wants to express her gratitude to the project team led by Dr. Meri Kulmala for collaboration and support, and to Prof. Nina Ivashinenko’s team in Nizhni Novgorod State University for the interview material used in the study.

 

References

Biryukova S., Sinyavskaya O. (2017) Children Out of Parental Care in Russia: What We Can Learn from the Statistics. The Journal of Social Policy Studies, 15(3): 367–382.

Buehler C., Cox M., Cuddeback G. (2003) Foster Parents’ Perceptions of Factors that Promote or Inhibit Successful Fostering. Qualitative Social Work, 2(1): 61–83.

Buehler C., Rhodes, K., Orme J., Cuddeback, G. (2006) The Potential for Successful Family Foster Care: Conceptualizing Competency Domains for Foster Parents. Child Welfare, 85(3): 523–559.

Chandler A. (2013) Democracy, Gender, and Social Policy in Russia. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Cook L. (2011) Russia’s Welfare Regime: The Shift Toward Statism. In: M. Jäppinen, M. Kulmala, A. Saarinen (eds.) Gazing at Welfare, Gender and Agency in Post-Socialist Countries. Newcastle; Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

Disney T. (2015) The Role of Emotion in Institutional Spaces of Russian Orphan Care: Policy and Practical Matters. In: M. Blazek, P. Kraftl (eds.) Children’s Emotions in Policy and Practice: Mapping and Making Spaces of Childhood. London: Palgrave: 17–33.

Gee J.P. (2010) An Introduction to Discourse Analysis: Theory and Method. London: Routledge.

Gilbert N. (1997) Combating Child Abuse: Comparative Perspectives on Reporting Systems and Placement Trends. New York: Oxford University Press.

Gilbert N., Parton N., Skivenes M. (2011) Child Protection Systems: International Trends and Orientations. New York: Oxford University Press.

Hämäläinen K. (2012) Perhehoitoon sijoitettujen lasten antamat merkitykset kodilleen ja perhesuhteilleen [The meanings given by children placed in foster care to their home and family relationships]. Väestöntutkimuslaitoksen julkaisusarja D 56/2012 (in Finnish).

Orme J., Cuddeback G., Buehler C., Cox M., Le Prohn N. (2007) Measuring Foster Parent Potential: Casey Foster Parent Inventory — Applicant Version. Research on Social Work Practice, 17(1): 77–92.

Khlinovskaya-Rockhill E. (2010) Lost to the State. Family Discontinuity, Social Orphanhood and Residential Care in the Russian Far East. New York: Berghahn Books.

Kulmala M. (2017) Paradigm Shift in Russian Child Welfare Policy. Russian Analytical Digest, 200(28): 5–11.

Kulmala M., Rasell M., Chernova Z. (2017) Overhauling Russia’s Child Welfare System: Institutional and Ideational Factors Behind the Paradigm Shift. The Journal of Social Policy Studies, 15(3): 353–366.

Kulmala M., Jäppinen M., Chernova Z. (2018) Child Protection System in Russia. In: The International Handbook of Child Welfare Systems (forthcoming).

Nikula J., Ivashinenko N. (2017) Foster Care Reform and Social Partnership in Nizhny Novgorod Region. The Journal of Social Policy Studies, 15(3): 383–394.

Pösö T., Skivenes M., Hestbaek A. (2013) Child protection systems within the Danish, Finnish and Norwegian welfare states — time for child centric approach? European Journal of Social Work, 17(4): 475–490.

Schofield G. (2002) The significance of a secure base: a psychosocial model of long-term foster care. Child and Family Social Work, 7(4): 259–272.

THL (2017) Lastensuojelun käsikirja [Child Protection Handbook]. [https://thl.fi/fi/web/lastensuojelun-kasikirja] (accessed: 21.12.2017) (in Finnish).

Tulensalo H. (2016) Lapsen tiedollinen toimijuus lastensuojelun sosiaalityössä [A child's informational agency in child welfare social work]. Professional Licentiate Thesis, University of Tampere [https://tampub.uta.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/98814/LISURI-1460708563.pdf?sequence=1] (accessed: 17.10.2017) (in Finnish).

Valkonen L. (2008) Mitä perhehoidosta tiedetään tutkimusten perusteella? [What do we know about foster care by research?] In: Sijoita perheeseen. Perhehoito inhimillisenä ja taloudellisena vaihtoehtona [Place to a family. Family care as a human and economic option]. Ketola J. (ed.). Jyväskylä: PS-Kustannus: 99–120 (in Finnish).

Voikukkia (2015) Voikukkia – toimivien käytäntöjen käsikirja [Dandelion – A Practical Guide]. Helsinki: Suomen kasvatus- ja perheneuvontaliitto. [https://www.voikukkia.fi/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2017/12/VOIKUKKIA-kasikirja2015.pdf] (accessed: 21.12.2017) (in Finnish).

Yarskaya-Smirnova E.R., Prisyazhnyuk D.I., Verbilovich O.E. (2015) Priyemnaya sem'ya v Rossii: publichnyy diskurs i mneniya klyuchevykh aktorov [Foster family in Russia: public discourse and opinions of key actors]. Zhurnal sotsiologii i sotsialnoy antropologii [The Journal of Sociology and Social Anthropology], 81(4): 157–173 (In Russian).