Outcomes of CPC-CBT in Sweden Concerning Psychosocial Well-Being and Parenting Practice: Children’s Perspectives

Thulin, Johanna; Nilsson, Doris; Svedin, Carl Göran; Kjellgren, Cecilia

doi:10.1177/1049731519843352

Cited by 5 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A child may not wish to disclose at all; however, the decision to disclose is often made from fear, and the fear of the unknown remains after the disclosure has been made. Therefore, informing and consulting the child throughout the disclosure process is crucial 22 . The example we give them will inform their developing conception of the social world and their self‐conception, affecting their ability to trust, share information, and express their feelings.…”

Section: Reporting Abuse—barriers To Disclosurementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Allnock and Miller emphasise that children may make several disclosures before any action is taken 23 . This often results in an inadequate safeguarding response preventing the child from being effectively protected 22 . Kelly 9 argues that the discrediting of an individual testimony leads to harm individually and collectively, often resulting in the mental health needs of the “LAC” being institutionally ignored.…”

Section: Reporting Abuse—barriers To Disclosurementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Therefore, informing and consulting the child throughout the disclosure process is crucial. 22 The example we give them will inform their developing conception of the social world and their self‐conception, affecting their ability to trust, share information, and express their feelings.…”

Section: Reporting Abuse—barriers To Disclosurementioning

confidence: 99%

“…23 This often results in an inadequate safeguarding response preventing the child from being effectively protected. 22 Kelly 9 argues that the discrediting of an individual testimony leads to harm individually and collectively, often resulting in the mental health needs of the “LAC” being institutionally ignored. Such children are often disregarded, or not considered to meet the criteria for legal intervention.…”

Section: Reporting Abuse—barriers To Disclosurementioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Stigma, epistemic injustice, and “looked after children”: The need for a new language

Fieller

Loughlin

2022

Evaluation Clinical Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article examines the processes that contribute to the stigmatization of a group of people typically identified as “children in care” or “looked after children.” In particular, we will look at the ways that we (adults, professionals, and carers) interact with these children, based on their status as both children and members of a socially marginalized and disadvantaged group, and how these modes of interaction can inhibit dialogue—a dialogue that is needed if we are to base our conceptions regarding the needs of these children on a more accurate understanding of their experiences and perspective. The problem is particularly challenging because the very terminology we use in the care community to identify this group is a product of the damaging preconceptions that have affected our interactions with its members and, we argue, it serves to reinforce those preconceptions. Using Fricker's work on epistemic injustice, in conjunction with evidence regarding how accusations of abuse and neglect of these children have been addressed in numerous cases, we illustrate the problems we have in hearing the voices of members of this group and the harmful effects this has on their own ability to understand and articulate their experiences. These problems represent “barriers to disclosure” that need to be surmounted if we are to establish a more inclusive dialogue. Currently, dialogue between these children and those of us charged to “look after” them is too often characterized by a lack of trust: not only in terms of the children feeling that their word is not taken seriously, that their claims are not likely to be believed, but also in their feeling that they cannot trust those to whom they might disclose abuse or neglect. The goals of the paper are modest in that we aim simply to open up the debate on how to meet this epistemic challenge, noting that there are specific problems that extend beyond those already identified for hearing the voices of other victims of epistemic injustice. Explicitly recognizing the nature and extent of the problem still leaves us a long way from its solution, but it is a crucial start.

show abstract

Section: Reporting Abuse—barriers To Disclosurementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Reporting Abuse—barriers To Disclosurementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Reporting Abuse—barriers To Disclosurementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Reporting Abuse—barriers To Disclosurementioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations