Narratives from parents in England and Norway

Power and emotions in child protection assessments


  • Vibeke Samsonsen
  • Elisabeth Willumsen



assessment, child protection, comparative study, emotions, narrative approach, power


The framework for assessment in child protection, as well as the context of the welfare state, differs between England and Norway. Assessments in England are structured in terms of a set model (the triangle) and procedures to be followed, whereas in Norway there are few national guidelines and not a set model for assessments. This underpins professional judgement as the most important component in Norway. This is a study of parents` experiences from assessment in these two contexts, and patterns and themes of assessment experiences have been identified in the two countries through a narrative analysis of in-depth interviews with parents. When asked about their opinions of the current assessment framework, parents in both countries talk more about feelings than about framework and procedures, as their experiences of assessment are similar in both countries. First and foremost, they experience strong emotions in a stressful situation, including anxiety, frustration and powerlessness, but also relief. These cross-national emotions might provide information about how assessment is a stressful situation for the parents involved. However, we find some differences in the way social work is acted out according to the national assessment framework and policy context. In England, the framework and procedures seem to provide clarity with regard to process and power within the system. In Norway, the assessment is characterized by a professional judgement accompanied by more resources, which we find enables helpful decisions from a family perspective. However, this heavy reliance on relationships using professional judgement might also be viewed as a source of informal power. These findings are discussed in relation to theories of emotions and the concept of power. Regarding implications for practice, we would recommend a more explicit awareness of help and control in assessment among social workers involved, together with a clear communication on the topic of emotions and power in assessment.

Author Biographies

Vibeke Samsonsen

Research Fellow
University of Stavanger

Elisabeth Willumsen

University of Stavanger


Baistow, K. (2000). Cross-national research: What can we learn from Inter-country Comparisons? Social Work in Europe, 7(3), 8-12.

Baker, A. J. L. (2007). Client feedback in child welfare programs: Current trends and future directions. Children and Youth Services Review, 29, 1189-1200.

Berg, B. L., & Lune, H. (2012). Qualitative Research Methods for the Social Sciences. New Jersey: Pearson.

Bochel, H., Bochel, C., Page, R., & Sykes, R. (2009). Social Policy. Themes, Issues and Debates. Harlow: Longmann.

Bolen, M. G., McWey, L. M., & Schlee, B. M. (2008). Are at-risk parents getting what they need? Perspectives of parents involved with child protective services. Clinical Social Work Journal, 36, 341-354.

Bowlby, J. (1884). Attachment. Harmondsworth: Penguin.

Chapman, M. V., Gibbons, C. B., Barth, R. P., McCrae, J. S,. & NSCAW Research Group (2003). Parental views of in-home services: What predicts satisfaction with child welfare workers? Child Welfare, 82, 571-596.

Chase, S. (2008). in Denzin, N.K., & Lincoln, Y.S.: Collecting and interpreting qualitative materials. London: Sage.

“Children Act” (1989). (England). “Child Welfare Act” (1992). (Norway).

Christiansen, Ø. (2011). Children in out of home placements. (PhD thesis), The faculty of psychology, University of Bergen.

Dale, P. (2004). “Like a fish in a bowl”: Parents’ perceptions of child protection services. Child Abuse Review, 13, 137-157.

Department of Health (2000a). Framework for the Assessment of Children in Need and Their Families. London: Department of Health.

Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2008). Collecting and interpreting qualitative materials. London: Sage.

Fisher, H. (1998). Lust, attraction, and attachment in Mammalian reproduction. Human Nature, 9(1) 23-52.

Forrester, D., Kershaw, S., Moss, H., & Houghes, L. (2008). Communication skills in child protection: How do social workers talk to parents? Child & Family Social Work, 13, 41-51.

Gilbert, N., Parton, N., & Skivenes, M. (2011). Child protection systems: International trends and emerging orientations. New York: Oxford University Press.

Hardy, F., & Darlington, Y. (2008). What parents value from formal support services in the context of identified child abuse. Child & Family Social Work, 13, 252- 261.

Holland, S. (2011). Child and Family Assessment in Social Work Practice. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.

Jarvinen, M., Larsen, J. E, & Mortensen, N. (2002). The powerful meeting between system and client. Aarhus University Press.

Josselson, A., Lieblich, A., & McAdams, D. P. (Eds.) (2003). Up close and personal. The teaching and learning of narrative research. Washington D.C., American Psychological Association.

Kane, A. (2006). Child Protection in Norway and England. Report 2006/3. Harstad: Harstad University College.

Khoo, E. G. (2004). Protecting our children: A comparative study of the dynamics in structure, intervention and their interplay in Swedish child welfare and Canadian child protection. Umeå: Umeå University,

Kirton, D. (2009). Child Social Work Policy and Practice. London: Sage Publications.

Klette, T. (2007). Time for comfort. NOVA Report 17/07. (Dr Philos thesis), The medical faculty, University of Oslo.

Kvello, Ø. (2010). Children at risk. Oslo: Gyldendal Akademisk.

Midjo, T. (2010). A study of the interaction between parents and social workers in child welfare services. (PhD thesis), Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim.

Munro, E. (2011). The Munro Review of Child Protection: Final Report. A Child-centred System. London: Department for Education.

Nissen, M. A., Pringle, K., & Uggerhøj, L. (2007). Power and change in social work. Akademisk forlag København.

NOU 2000:12. (2000). Barnevernet i Norge. Oslo: Departementenes servicesenter, Informasjonsforvaltning. [White Paper: Child Protection in Norway]

Ragin, C. (1994). Constructing social research. California: Pine Forge Press. Riessman, C. K. (2008). Narrative methods for the human sciences. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.

Samsonsen, V. (2009). A process of agreement. Fontene 2(9), 48-55.

Samsonsen, V., & Turney, D. (2015). The role of professional judgement in social work assessment: A comparison between Norway and England. Submitted January 2015.

Samsonsen, V., & Willumsen, E. (2014). Assessment in Child Protection. Social worker`s voices in England and Norway. Journal of Comparative Social Work. 1.

Schore, J. R., & Schore, A. N. (2008). Modern Attachment Theory: The Central Role of Affect Regulation in Development and Treatment. Clinical Social Work Journal, 36(1), 9-20.

Shaw, I., Briar-Lawson, K., Orme, J., & Ruckdeschel, R. (2013). The Sage Handbook of Social Work Research. London: Sage.

Smith, R. (2010). Total parenting. Educational Theory, 60(3), 357-369.

Stang-Dahl, T. (1978). Child Protection and Protecting Society. (PhD thesis), Faculty of Law, University of Oslo.

Statistics of Norway (SSB): Downloaded 9th of February 2015 from

Studsrød, I., Willumsen, E., & Ellingsen, I. (2012). Parents’ perception of contact with the Norwegian Child Welfare Services. Child & Family Social Work. doi:10. 111/cfs 12004.

Thrana, H. M., & Fauske, H. (2014). The emotional encounter with child welfare services: The importance of incorporating the emotional perspective in parents’ encounters with child welfare workers. European Journal of Social Work, 17(2), 221-236.

Turney, D., Platt, D., Selwyn, J., & Farmer, E. (2012). Improving Child and Family Assessments: Turning Research into Practice. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.

Uggerhøj, L. (2011). To be assessed. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.

UK statistics: Downloaded 25th of February from

White, S., Wastell, D., Broadhurst, K., & Hall, C. (2010). When policy overleaps itself: The ‘tragic tale’ of the Integrated Children’s System. Critical Social Policy, 30 (3), 405-429.

Willumsen, E. (2005). Service user participation/quality and legitimacy in the welfare services. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.

Willumsen, E., & Severinsson, E. (2005). Parents’ collaboration and participation in a residential child care setting. International Journal of Child & Family Welfare,1, 19-31.

Winefield, H. R., & Barlow, J. A. (1995). Client and worker satisfaction in a child protection agency. Child Abuse & Neglect, 19, 897-905




How to Cite

Samsonsen, V., & Willumsen, E. (2015). Narratives from parents in England and Norway: Power and emotions in child protection assessments. Journal of Comparative Social Work, 10(1), 6–30.