Suchergebnisse

In this article, authors analyze the legal regulation of the work of Child rights protection (CRP) specialists in the context of the transformation of the CRP system in Lithuania. Intensive changes in the legislation and practice organization field of CRP over the last three years have created preconditions for better operational functioning of the system. However, it can be concluded that the professional status of CRP specialists is not yet completely shaped. There are no requirements for the qualification, the procedure for its promotion and certification; the work of specialists is more defined by the functions they perform than by professional competence. Although workers work in risky, emotionally challenging conditions, health and safety measures are not definitely determined. The basic legislation shaping the protection and welfare of the rights of children pays little attention to them, they do not distinguish as a separate category of employees, and the specifics of their activities are not clearly identified. During last three years some activities, such as assessment of the child's and family's situation, and the procedure of removing a child from its family and others have become more regulated. On the one hand, such regulations provide methodological assistance for their professional decisions; on the other hand, it may also create certain restrictions for their freedom and for development of their competencies. It is important that the principle of individualization remains in professional practice. CRP professionals constantly face dilemmas where they need to balance between support and control. Discussions and reflections on these situations could become be a stimulus for the conceptualization of such practices in the Lithuanian CRP system.

AbstractObjectiveThis article aims to identify the different truths perceived and experienced by the four main parties involved in the process of removing children from families. Furthermore, the article examines the potential implications of these individuals' "versions of the truth" on the public discourse.BackgroundThis article offers a unique lens for analyzing situations when children are removed from their homes by employing the principles of the sociology of knowledge and the concept of the Rashomon effect. This combination reveals the different truths, reasons, and motives of all parties involved in situations of removing children from their homes in Lithuania.MethodSeventy‐one semistructured interviews were undertaken with the parties who have direct experience of the process of child removal from families: children, parents, child protection workers (CPWs), and the police.ResultsThe interviews with parents reveal the unexpectedness and unfairness of the removal situation, and lack of institutional support in their efforts to recover the child. Similarly, for children the removal experience was traumatizing, resulting in losing trust in their parents and CPWs. However, in some cases they were glad to be taken away from the neglecting and violent environment. Child protection workers experience strong emotions and face ethical dilemmas during the removal. Nevertheless, they perceive themselves as life‐saving professionals who meet children's best interests.ConclusionsThe research revealed that all four involved parties have their own diverse and competing truths. These truths do not have equal chances to be told, listened to, or to shape the general discourse. They are limited by privacy, professionalism requirements, and feelings of shame and guilt.ImplicationsThe research results have implications for further research, practice, and policy. They offer a methodological approach, combining competing truths, which can guide the daily work of child protection workers. On the policy level, the results of this study might be helpful for professionals in other countries developing or reforming their child protection systems.The ability to openly express one's truth can be seen as a crucial factor, serve as a means of parents' attempts to publicly prove one's suitability to care for children, or CPWs' professionalism in making appropriate decisions.

This article explores the attitudes of Japanese and Lithuanian social work program teachers towards the challenges posed by modern technologies that may transform social work profession and studies. Study data revealed that scientists from both countries admit that "taming" technologies and optimally "cooperating" with them is the main challenge of social work practice and studies. On the one hand, belief that technological development will provide more opportunities to fulfil the mission of social work was prevalent among the study participants, on the other hand, they had expressed concern that eventually the use of technology will change the essence of social work as a profession of human relations or will create modified forms of social exclusion. Additionally, a niche for the new role of the social worker was identified: to help the world "occupied" by technology remain "social". Attitudes of research participants from both Lithuania and Japan can be linked to traditional concept of sociality and vision of social work as profession that belongs exclusively to area of human relations. B. Latour's asocial sociality concept can be applied for broader look into this situation. This concept states that efforts to trace the contribution of actors of an inhuman nature to what belongs in the human world may be more successful when one ceases to view the world exclusively through human eyes and tries to reveal the inner perspectives of phenomena of a mixed nature.

Numerous studies have focused on the issue of client aggression against various help professionals. Much less attention has been paid to the opposite phenomenon—the aggression of help professionals towards clients, especially aggression of child rights protection specialists (CRPS). Comparative analysis of four perspectives (CRPS, parents, children, and police officers) was performed in order to reveal the manifestations and preconditions of CRPS aggression towards parents and children during the process of removing a child from a family. The manifestations of psychological and physical CRPS aggression were alluded to by all groups of research participants. The preconditions can be classified as being related to the behavior of the child and parents, the employee's personality traits, competencies and psychological states related to a specific work situation, and institutional, inter-institutional, social, and political contexts. Based on our research results, suggestions can be made on how the procedure of removing a child from an unsafe family environment can be improved, such as by making it less harmful for children, more constructive for the whole family, and making the CRP system operate in such a manner that it does not create preconditions for CRPS to transgress the boundaries of professional relations.

Numerous studies have focused on the issue of client aggression against various help professionals. Much less attention has been paid to the opposite phenomenon—the aggression of help professionals towards clients, especially aggression of child rights protection specialists (CRPS). Comparative analysis of four perspectives (CRPS, parents, children, and police officers) was performed in order to reveal the manifestations and preconditions of CRPS aggression towards parents and children during the process of removing a child from a family. The manifestations of psychological and physical CRPS aggression were alluded to by all groups of research participants. The preconditions can be classified as being related to the behavior of the child and parents, the employee's personality traits, competencies and psychological states related to a specific work situation, and institutional, inter-institutional, social, and political contexts. Based on our research results, suggestions can be made on how the procedure of removing a child from an unsafe family environment can be improved, such as by making it less harmful for children, more constructive for the whole family, and making the CRP system operate in such a manner that it does not create preconditions for CRPS to transgress the boundaries of professional relations.

2022 m. spalio 14 d. Vilniaus universitete vyko II kasmetinė nacionalinė socialinės politikos konferencija "Gyvenimo kelias ir jo krizės: kaip (ar) veikia Lietuvos socialinė politika?"Universiteto g. 3, Vilniushttps://youtu.be/oBGfbjJijPY