Barnahus Linköping Started in 2005, first in Sweden. Today around 30 various structured

Challenging standards Best interest of the child IA planning & case review

What has evolved through the years? Prosecutor presence in the adjacent room has increased significantly. Thanks to pressure from higher authorities. Not more resources, but a structural change with “Barnahus weeks”. Information meetings with parents, sometimes together with the child. Within a week after the interview. Important for them to see where their child has been. Crisis intervention is given or is offered. CPCCBT, Combined Parent Child Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, for families where there has been physical child abuse. Information to staff at schools and preschools in all the 9 municipalities. Barnahus staff is presence in the adjacent room in every interview.

What help us to ensure the best of the child? Routines (“hands on”) We have learned that when procedures are not followed, it usually means negative consequences! Cooperation agreements, which includes collaboration partners commitments. The initial agreement lacked commitments. Checklists, for example social service´s risk assessment. List where every small step in the process is being viewed from a child's perspective. Periodic update. Follow ups with the persons accompanies the child to Barnahus, the “Safe persons”. Evaluation of the flow of the process and other kind of evaluations. When the child follows the parents to the information meeting, we talk to the child separately, provided that it´s ok for the child. This year we will start with more structured, evidence based, questionnaires.

How can we get hold of the children's own voices? Challenges… Law´s of secrecy Approval to follow-ups and evaluations. Both legal guardians must approve. Most importantly: the ethical aspects How, and when, can we ask the children about their experiences in an ethical manner? - Not right to ask them when they are at Barnahus, just after the interview. Will the answer be reliably? Will they feel pressured to deliver “right” answers?? Do they feel they can choose not to answer? - Conflict of loyalty - If they are still meeting the abuser, can they give a genuine answer? And if we ask them – do we increase the pressure?

IA planning and case review What makes it work? Joint consultation meeting Different kind of consultation meetings, based on the current needs. Weekly team meetings Barnahus staff – 5 persons (3 social workers, 1 psychologist, 1 team assistant) Formal documents describing procedures and routines. Liaison group Meets once a month, an important forum to address any kind of issues. Steering Committee Meets 5 times a year.

IA planning and case review What makes it challenging? Legislation on privacy Confidentiality between collaborating authorities: Social Services in 9 municipalities, public prosecutor, the police, Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, the children´s hospital, forensic medicine, the County Council.  Difficult for the Barnahus staff to follow a case throughout the process.  Important to have good cooperation, good knowledge of and trust in each other's profession.  “Gray area” in terms of the law and to exchange information on consultation meetings. Lack of documentation at Barnahus (due to privacy laws) Each authority is responsible for its documentation and Barnahus has no coherent documentation. There is a register in which names and social security numbers are linked to case numbers. Also short notes from consultation meetings, interviews and decisions by prosecutors.

Room for forensic interviews