Report: how my practical placement fits in the Dutch system

It is for me really hard to compare the EHO unit of Lauste with something in the Netherlands. This is through the fact that we don’t have something like it. However, we have places who have a similar function like one of the many things EHO does. There for  I shall mention in this task multiple institutions in the Netherlands. Also the way child welfare is organized is different  in the Netherlands then here in Finland. Therefore I shall first handle the differences on a macro level, before I go to the meso level. The micro level is to specialized and too hard to explain in general for the size of this report so I shall leave this out.

The child protection and child welfare system is currently in transformation in the Netherlands. In 2001 and 2004 the Netherlands faced major accidents in the protection of children and youngsters. In 2001 we had “the case of the girl of Nulde”, (Meisje van Nulde in Dutch). Her head, torso and limbs were found on the beach of Nulde, a small village in the Netherlands. Her stepfather beaten her so heavily she died. The child protection board just conclude in a report some weeks before the first part of her body was found that she was not in danger and she wasn’t enrolled in to child protection. The biggest and heaviest blow came in 2004 with is now known as “case Savanna” (zaak Savanna in Dutch) were both her parents beat her often, transport her in the cargo hold of the car. And when she died, they try to hide the evidence by putting her body in a plastic sack and put it with the trash. While this all happened, a social worker from the Dutch child protection services visited the family once per week. Because of these cases, child protection and welfare are very high regulated by the government and inspections are much more frequent then it was ever before. Also the Dutch government sought a way to overhaul the whole system and looked behind the borders for solutions. They found this in the Finnish child protection and child welfare system and the whole system is now in progress to become more like the Finnish way handle child protection matters. Our minister of Social affairs called when the change was first announced “A Finnish renovation for Dutch buildings”. Meaning that we don’t shut down the old system and copy the Finnish system exactly, but introduce the Finnish way in to the old system and change it so could handle the Finnish way. Therefore, it is actually funny for me to notice that in Finland, the system also get an overhaul due of budget cuts. Because laws change every year due the transition, I use the situation as it is now. Because that is what I know best at the moment.

Like I said before, the Netherlands doesn’t has places like EHO or Lauste as whole. Instead of that, the child or youngster go into foster care or to an institution if they can’t live at home anymore. These two option are seen as a last resort, in most cases a social worker enters the family and he or she works with to ensure that the child can stay at home. In recent years, they main topic in this became: how can the environment and the family to be as safe as possible for the child. This means that not the behavior of the parent(s) but the situation as whole has to be safe. For instance: If the Father has severe alcohol problems and has even an addiction to alcohol. But the child gets proper food, is properly dressed and gets all the other basics needs. The child can stay at home, because probably the mother is capable of taking care of the child. Child protection then aims to support the mother so she able to do her motherly tasks and they try to control the father alcohol addiction. Main viewpoint is that the child stays at home as long as possible. In general this is the same as in Finland, but difference is that a judge has to decided it a social worker is placed in the family or not. This is unlike Finland were the help is voluntary in some extant.  A social worker is always entitled by a judge in the Netherlands, because he or she takes part of juridical position of the parents. They can’t make legal decisions any more without notifying and the acknowledgement of the social worker.  For some parents it is a blessing that someone is helping them and the report themselves at the proper place, but most parents don’t want this at all. They don’t like that a judge had decided that they aren’t good parents and help is required. In Finland there is no judge and the municipality and the social workers can decided this.  

After the decision is made a child goes to temporary foster care or permanent foster care.  They go actually almost always first to the temporary one, because everyone is hopeful the child returns to the parents. If it is unlikely or the child goes to a permanent foster family. If this happens the parents have no longer the legal right to parenting the child. Only a judge can decided revered this. If the child is going to a temporary foster family. The legal right for parenting is also temporary abolished. This is unlike Finland where parents always have the right to parenting the child they have to be included as much as possible in decisions regarding the child. In the Netherlands we want this also, but the laws curtly still says that if a child is removed from home, the parent(s) greatly lose their parenting rights.  This means in general that decisions can be made without notifying the parents. Only the legal guardian is informed, because by law, every child has a legal guardian. This can be the parent or the social worker involved in the family. Another possibility could be that a child goes to a family replacing home (gezinsvervangendtehuis). These are more intuition like, but can be compared most with places like Lauste in Finland. Mostly kids and youngsters  go their when they have severe behavior and personality disorders or, sadly, temporary when there is no place in a foster family and they aren’t entitled for crisis care. The these are far more intuitionalized than the ones in Finland. The youngsters still have their own room but they have a common living room, like in Finland. But the difference is that it is stricter with more rules. They can’t roam the premises freely but they have to say where they are the whole time. Most often they only leave the place on guided activities. Also common sessions like discussion groups and dinner is done together. Not following the rules means that they get sanctioned. In Finland they want to be as home as possible. In the Netherlands, the main thought is that the youngster will be responsible adults. This might give you the idea that youngsters are in closed settings when they are in a institution. That is not true, because everyone has the right to go outside unless a judge decide that they have to be placed into a closed because of sever personality or behavior problems. Even then going outside is restricted but not prohibited. In the Netherlands this can only be prohibited if a youngster commits a criminal act and is send to jail.

Finland doesn’t have youth prison like the Netherlands does.  Although a prison and EHO are two completely different institutions, they are compatible in some extant. If I compare EHO with the Dutch youth prison system. In both the youngsters are prohibited to go outside, except a small fenced area where they can go  to get some fresh air.  Also their contact with the parents is restricted. They can meet them once per week, but can call them on more moments per week. A difference in this that in the Dutch jail system the phone calls and parent visits are a right of the youngster. In EHO this can be prohibited if it is better for the youngster because he or she is a rape victim or was otherwise abused by the parents. In other places in the Dutch welfare system this is possible, but the jail is mainly for punishment and also in providing help so the youngster will never return to the prison. EHO is mainly to determine what the best course of action in the Finnish welfare system. But also as a wakeup call that something has to change in their behavior in some cases. In both the Dutch youth prison system and EHO, the youngsters have to go to school. And both cases the school comes to them, because they can’t leave the building. A minor difference is the legislation. In the Netherlands youngsters have to go to school till they are 18 years old, in Finland it is 16 years old. But they can still receive education in Finland beyond that if they want continue their studies.

As pointed out in this essay, the Netherlands have a diversion in youth legal issues and youth welfare. This division became into effect in 2004 by legation, but was already in effect in daily situations. The reason for this was that most institutions prisons had already a branch which was more specialist in to helping youngsters then was possible in the legal system. As of 2004, the separation was also put in effect in law so they became different institutions. Therefor a place like EHO cannot exist in the Netherlands because it combines two things that have to be separated by Dutch law. Namely the caring task and the freedom prohibiting and restricting tasks. In the Dutch system you cannot put both accents on one intuition, it has to be two different once. So they can specialize in their task given and support the child the best way they can.