‘I Got to Know Myself Better, My Failings and Faults’

Tensions and Trade-Offs – Staff’s Understanding of Children as Rights Holders in Secure Care

“…This type of programme is undoubtedly problematic in relation to the fundamental principle that children and young people are individual rights holders. This finding is consistent with previous studies (see Tompkins-Rosenblatt and VanderVen, 2005;Enell, 2017;Vogel, 2020) as well as our earlier study based on interviews with children in secure care, where they highlighted that, when the token economy is applied, children's rights are linked not only to what they do but also to who they are as individual persons (Enell et al, 2023).…”

“…However, it also reveals a lack of inclusive practices in which children can influence decisions concerning their own lives and, in that sense, are treated as actors (Lundy, 2007;Tisdall, 2016;Leviner, 2020). The lack of influence and empowerment of children in practice is particularly true for children, such as those placed in residential care (Besell, 2011;Enell, 2017;Henriksen, 2022). Additionally, studies indicate that children in residential settings appear to have particularly low awareness of their rights (Brunnberg and Visser-Schuurman, 2015;Höfte et al, 2021).…”

“My Whole Family Is Not Really My Family”—Secure Care Shadows on Family and Family Practices Among Young Adults and Their Family Members

“…We present a follow-up study of young adults with experiences of secure care. In the previous study, the first author repeatedly (three times) interviewed 16 young persons (placed into secure care in autumn 2010 or spring 2011) during and after their institutional placement (Enell, 2016(Enell, , 2017. In 2018 and 2019, these 16 young adults were contacted again via informational letters, phone, social media, and, in some cases, through their parents.…”

The ambiguities of coercion: Mapping adolescents' experiences of coercion in institutional everyday life

“…Children and young people in institutional care are often subject to some form of diagnostic surveillance. Sometimes, the main objective of their stay is to make a psychiatric or sociopsychological assessment to enable care or treatment in the right institutional context (Enell, 2017). This implies being observed and assessed in everyday activities and interactions with staff and peers and having these entered into electronic logs accessible to the staff (Cox, 2011; Walker et al, 2005).…”

“…They also develop strategies for obscuring the penal materiality such as closing blinds to avoid seeing the fence outside (De Valk et al, 2019). In hindsight, many of the adolescents acknowledge their need for placement and some appreciate the structured everyday life (Haynes et al, 2011; Steckley & Kendrick, 2008; Walker et al, 2005), but the first couple of weeks can be dominated by emotions such as fear, uncertainty, frustration and longing for family and peers (Enell, 2017; Henriksen & Refsgaard, 2020). Schliehe (2014) argues that the emotional response of young women having lived in secure care can be nightmares, anxiety and anger, which endure long after the stay has been terminated.…”