Summary:

The report was written on commission by the Norwegian Ministry of Children and Families. The research which lay the foundation for the report has been conducted at the Centre for Research on Discretion and Paternalism, located at the University of Bergen.

The Norwegian child protection system, Barnevernet, is renowned worldwide with purely negative connotations (Skivenes, 2019a). This report compares the Norwegian child protection system with the child protection systems in five countries that are known critics of Barnevernet, and vocal in the public debate. The five countries are the Czech Republic, Lithuania, Poland, Romania and Russia. The main goal of the report is to present quality assured information about the child protection systems in these countries, and examine whether differences in the respective countries child protection systems may explain some of the criticism against the Norwegian child protection system.

The report reveals that there are overall huge differences in the functioning of general governmental systems, protection of children´s rights and living standards, when comparing Norway to the selected five East-European countries. In Norway it is a lower threshold for service intervention in the Norwegian child protection system, compared to the child protection system in the other countries concerned. The report also reveals that the post-communist countries are undoubtedly influenced by their socialist legacy, especially with regard to children living in institutions. While Norway has most children in alternative family care, the other five countries still have a high number of children living in institutions. However, the CPS in the eastern-European countries are rapidly changing. Recent legislations and reforms in i.a. Romania and Russia, reveal that seemingly the countries are turning more towards Norway’s low-threshold and family-oriented approach.

With regard to the criticism against Norway, the report reveals that most of the official criticism against Norway focus on the need for a consistent child protection practice, with less use of discretion. Training of child protection workers is seen as one of the central tools that would support a more coherent implementation of child rights and national child protection criteria.