[st_logo css=".vc_custom_1503480916478{margin-bottom: 15px !important;}"]
[scp_theme_button title="Newsletter" align="center" link="url:http%3A%2F%2Feepurl.com%2FdbQ8iL||target:%20_blank|" el_class="wh-header-button" css=".vc_custom_1542190975506{border-top-width: 0px !important;border-right-width: 0px !important;border-bottom-width: 0px !important;border-left-width: 0px !important;padding-top: 15px !important;padding-bottom: 15px !important;background-color: #0a968a !important;}"]
CREDIT: Colourbox / Centre for Research on Discretion and Paternalism

Room for improving the child-friendliness of courts

NEW ARTICLE: J. D. Berrick, J. Dickens, T. Pöso and M. Skivenes have published an article in International Journal of Children’s Rights.

Court proceedings such as care order or removal cases are often a sincere distress for the child in question. Reports have found that shortcomings as for example intimidating settings, lack of age appropriate information and lack of child involvement are recurring challenges in these proceedings.

In the article “International Perspectives on Child Responsive Courts”, professor Skivenes and her co-authors asked judicial officials in four countries how they view the child friendliness of the courts. Six topics were covered, including:

Professor Marit Skivenes (CREDIT: Otto von Mûnchow)

  • Children’s right to express their views
  • Child-sensitive time frame
  • Child-friendly environment
  • Child-friendly language
  • Child-friendly manner of collecting statements by children
  • Children’s rights as paramount frame for decision making

The results indicate that there is a considerable room for improvement of both structure and practice of court proceedings.

– At a minimum, child responsive courts include thoughtful architecture, well trained staff, therapeutic support and ample time to prepare children before, during and after the hearings, professor Marit Skivenes states.

The findings also show considerable differences between England, Finland, Norway and the US (California), as well as within systems. Skivenes and her co-authors notes that such variations may challenge the principle of equal treatment and justice for all.

– It does not bode well if children have very different opportunity and support to participate, depending on which court room their case happen to be assigned to. In that sense, training for the judicial decision makers as essential.

Read the full article (open access):

About the authors

Jill D. Berrick is professor II at Centre for Research on Discretion and Paternalism

Jonathan Dickens is a collaborative partner at Centre for Research on Discretion and Paternalism

Tarja Pösö is professor II at Centre for Research on Discretion and Paternalism

Marit Skivenes is professor and research director at Centre for Research on Discretion and Paternalism

PHOTO CREDIT (featured image): Colourbox / Centre for Research on Discretion and Paternalism

Comments are closed.