Abstract
AbstractThis article examines the confidence the population (N = 4,003) has in the child welfare system in four countries – England, Finland, Norway and the USA (California). We find that about half or less of the population reports having confidence in the system, which is slightly higher than the confidence in the civil servants in the same countries. The Nordic countries display more confidence in the child welfare system than the Anglo‐American countries. The similarity between the countries is, however, greater than anticipated. As for independent variables that can shed light on differences in confidence levels, we find three variables to be related to a higher confidence level, and these are a left wing political orientation, lower age, and higher education. This study contributes in filling a knowledge gap on studies about trust in the child welfare system, but we emphasize that we have studied an aspect of trust that rests on the population's impressions of a system, and not their substantial knowledge about, or identification with, this system.
Highlights
The child welfare system and its decision makers, child welfare workers and judges, are delegated power to intervene in the private sphere if it is found necessary in order to protect a child
We examine the level of trust and confidence the general population in four countries – England, Finland, Norway and the USA (California) – has in its child welfare system, and its child welfare workers and judges who make child welfare decisions
The findings show that about 40 per cent of the population expresses quite a lot or a great deal of confidence in the child welfare systems in these four countries, cf. table 1, which presents an overview of the frequencies for the trust levels for the whole sample of four countries
Summary
The child welfare system and its decision makers, child welfare workers and judges, are delegated power to intervene in the private sphere if it is found necessary in order to protect a child. Just Institutions Matter, he emphasizes how Max Weber early on made the point that ‘... the implementation of policy by bureaucrats – was as least as important, for it was this side of the state with which citizens came into direct contact, and on which they were dependent’ (Rothstein 1998: 165)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
