Stop coercion and pressure when suitable education is not available

Reason for the conference

Conflicts are increasingly arising between parents, schools and/or care providers about what a child needs, who has the duty of care and who will pay for the additional tailored support. Mediators (such as education consultants) are then needed to de-escalate such conflicts. It regularly happens that education or care professionals pressure parents to accept the provision of support through the child protection system (a Veilig Thuis notification and a supervision order). This is based on the (also naïve) assumption that parents will receive help more quickly in this way. But the child protection system was never intended for this: it is a framework of pressure and coercion intended to safeguard children’s safety—with all the consequences this entails for families.

A Veilig Thuis notification causes considerable damage

The conference began with the story of two parents who impressively shared their experience of arranging education for their child. They were unable to reach an agreement with the school, which, among other things, resulted in several Veilig Thuis notifications. It became clear how great the impact had been. Even when the matter only proceeds to an investigation and the conclusion is that there is no child abuse. ‘A Veilig Thuis notification is easily made, but recovering from it takes the family years,’ one parent said. Such a notification is highly distressing and undermines you as a parent. You are portrayed as a bad parent. This creates so much fear and destroys all trust in the professional. ‘Provide family members with aftercare following an unfounded notification,’ suggested one of the parents.

Amend the reporting code

These parents, as well as other speakers, were very clear about the following recommendation: ‘When education is not working, do not shift the responsibility to youth care. Stop involving Veilig Thuis in education-related problems. Let parents and schools look for solutions together.’ The reporting code for domestic violence and child abuse for education professionals should be amended accordingly.

It was also pointed out that step 3 of the reporting code is often not applied correctly. This step states that the professional should speak with the parents about the concerns and the consideration of making a Veilig Thuis notification. That is different from informing the parent that a notification has been made, which is often what happens in practice. The advice is to discuss the concerns first and only then assess whether a notification is necessary.

How effective is a notification?

Safety is central to youth policy and the child protection system: ‘Every child safe’ is the slogan. But what does that mean? When do we speak of safety, and can we actually guarantee it together? These questions arose several times, particularly in the context of pressure and coercion. How do these relate to the child’s safety? We often do not know what the consequences of a pressure-and-coercion process are or what its effects are on the child and family. Such processes can also cause harm and therefore create insecurity for both parent and child rather than safety. Especially when they damage the bond between parent and child. Mariëlle Bruning, Professor of Youth Law at Leiden University, pointed out that parents are afraid of pressure. In her view, this should not be necessary when there is meaningful participation and a willingness to work together.

More important levers for achieving improvement lie in conversations with parents. We can make progress by investing in professionals’ attitudes towards parents and in their skills to engage in and maintain dialogue with them. We should also pay attention to the emotional regulation of parents (fear and anger) and professionals (fear of disciplinary proceedings, the consequences of failing to intervene when intervention was warranted, and angry parents). Fear plays an important role for both groups and can determine their conduct and actions, with undesirable effects as a result.

Child protection services must not provide assistance

Adri van Montfoort’s contribution was inspiring. He has been involved in youth care for many years and gave a historical overview, showing, among other things, that youth care is increasingly less permitted to provide assistance. Child protection council investigators, child protection case managers, youth care agencies, Veilig Thuis and the various coordinators/consultants in municipal teams are not allowed to provide assistance.’ What do they contribute, then, and who provides help? Adri arrives at a simpler system, with a number of clear recommendations: child protection, youth care and a clearer protective role for the juvenile court in safeguarding children’s safety.

Learning from Belgium

The final part of the conference was a valuable dialogue between Jolande uit Beijerse (Associate Professor of criminal law and criminal procedural law at Erasmus School of Law) and Johan Put (Professor of Youth and Social Law at KU Leuven), in which they compared the Dutch system with the Flemish youth care system. It became clear that our system of coercion does not provide sufficient protection for parents and children. In Flanders, for example, both the child and the parents have a lawyer (who accompanies the child until adulthood). Another recommendation is to allow more time for people to speak during hearings. Currently, in cases involving an out-of-home placement, this is limited to just five minutes.

Next steps

This conference certainly has not said the last word on this important subject. It is also very much alive among parents. For example, several parents recently started a petition. The conference succeeded in highlighting the parents’ perspective on pressure and coercion and in making clear that a lack of suitable education, a lack of knowledge or perverse (financial) incentives must not lead to (more) pressure and coercion. The Balans Parents’ Association is incorporating all the input into a statement, and a small group of attendees will address specific issues. To be continued.

More information can be found on the Balans website.

Marieke Boon is a thematic adviser on suitable education at Ouders & Onderwijs. The working conference was organised by the Balans Parents’ Association with the cooperation of the Association for Intensive Child Care BVIKZ, Ieder(in), the Care for Youth Programme and Ouders & Onderwijs.