Unaccompanied immigrant children in long term foster care: Identifying needs and best practices from a child welfare perspective

Discourses between the Public and the Private: Transnational Families at the Crossroads

“…It might thus well be that lack of Norwegian competence, that is, comprehension on the mother's part, was partly misinterpreted as unwillingness to cooperate. Such misinterpretations are frequently reported in other cases, especially in institutional communication (Crea et al 2018).…”

“…We aim to broaden family language policy research focus in two ways: (i) we demonstrate how media discourses shape images of parenting and state involvement but also how parents orient to mediatized state agents; and (ii) we transcend earlier studies of family language policy by taking into account the child welfare service as a state institution and its tasks to provide familyrelated services that may have an impact on language policy. While adoptive families have been addressed in family language policy research (Fogle 2012;Wright 2020), there is an almost complete absence of work on foster care and family language policy, and the decision-making process around placements, the reasons for choosing foster families, and how this might be linked to perceptions of adequate language and cultural resources (Crea et al 2018). In this article, we aim to address questions related to languages in families as a public and private concern in light of current theory.…”

Unaccompanied Minors: Worldwide Research Perspectives

“…The eighth country, Spain, has a different vision of the issue, Table 2 shows the main keywords used in the countries with the highest number of publications on the subject of unaccompanied minors. As can be observed, in the first 5 countries, which are the USA, the UK, Germany, Sweden, and Norway, their main keywords are "refugees", associated with "asylum", "age determination" or "health problems" [32,33]. The following countries (Italy and Belgium) have "age determination" as their main keyword, especially in Italy, where the three keywords revolve around this issue.…”

Foster care for unaccompanied refugee children

“…However, in some situations, living with biological family might not offer the most desirable outcome for the child, e.g., because the child has not lived with their biological parents for a long time and family roles could have changed accordingly (Derluyn & Ang, 2020). Nevertheless, in most situations, reunification with parents is seen as the preferred option (Evans et al, 2018;Steinbock, 1996) and is in line with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UN, 1989) article 9 (separation from parents) and article 18 (parental responsibilities and state assistance), and the Guidelines on Alternative Care for Children (United Nations General Assembly, 2009).…”

“…Other studies (e.g., Hodes et al, 2008;Mitra & Hodes, 2019;Ní Raghallaigh, 2013;Zijlstra et al, 2019) have also emphasised the importance of highly supportive living arrangements such as foster care for the well-being of unaccompanied children. Recently, there has been interest in unaccompanied refugee children in foster care (see e.g., Crea et al, 2017Crea et al, , 2018Rogers et al, 2018;Sirriyeh & Ní Raghallaigh, 2018;Van Holen, Trogh, Carlier, et 54 Chapter 3 al., 2019;Wade, 2019). However, empirical research on those in "cultural foster care" 15 is lacking, even though there are major differences for unaccompanied refugee children between cultural foster placements and cross-cultural foster placements:…”