Invited to labour or participate: intra- and inter-generational distinctions and the role of capital in children’s invited participation

Abstract

This paper applies aspects of Bourdieu's conceptual toolkit related to capital, and analyses inter-and intra-generational relations of influence. Applying Bourdieu's concepts to examples of case studies from a children's parliament in Finland, and with reference to an adult resident forum, moments of continuity and disruption in the relatively stable patterns of distinction between children and adults emerge. Children in school councils (at times) are labourers for agendas set by teachers, but the children at the top of the structure's hierarchy can benefit from cultural capital and a functional capital that enables them to set agendas and direct the work of others. The political capital of the person presenting views from the participation sphere and the dominant symbolic capital of market logics appear to have a greater impact than generation on the influence participants achieve. Unquestioned acceptance of this differentiation suggests that new approaches to invited participation structures are needed.

Working back to the future: strengthening radical social work with children and young people, and their perspectives on resilience, capabilities and overcoming adversity

“…Radical social work might therefore again be inspired by Freirean forms of participatory action (for example, Rogowski, 1995, Larkins, 2016 and, for example, the Black Lives Matter movement; these are 'making a difference' activities that focus on bringing about change through critical reflection and action, raising consciousness about barriers and continuing action to achieve change. It must involve linking children and young people's concerns to wider policy decisions and mechanisms in order to hold political decision-making to account (for example, Larkins, 2011;Kiili and Larkins, 2018 ).…”

Children at the centre of safety: challenging the false juxtaposition of protection and participation

“…Stronger action-orientation practice focused on social justice would provide greater potential to achieve the changes that children and young people seek, and to understand the conditions that are limiting these changes. At the same time, caution and critical awareness are also needed as reviews of co-production and child participation have shown that neo-liberal participatory practice can be a means of responsibilising service users of any age (Beresford, 2008;Needham and Carr, 2009;Kiili and Larkins, 2018) placing greater emphasis on individual's responsibility to care for themselves and denying them the social resources (or control over these) that would enable them to direct social action. Further, current financial "austerity" measures and shifting working environments in which child protection services shuffle between being outsourced and then brought back into local authorities are limiting opportunities for professionals to dedicate the time needed to develop continuity of relationships and to be able to share and learn from each other's examples of effective protective participatory practice.…”

Professionals’ views on children’s service user involvement

“…As a social structural category, the generational order(s) is always present, if not necessarily that visibly or always the most important standpoint, but it is invariably there (Punch, 2020;Alanen and Mayall, 2001). The current literature on children's collective participation emphasises the importance of intergenerational relations and calls for a focus on the generational difference (Cuevas-Parra and Tisdall, 2019;Kiili and Larkins 2018;Moran-Ellis and Sü nker, 2018). Although our study is confined to professionals' views, it does enable us to unpick meanings given to children's service user involvement.…”