Introduction

This chapter uses reflexivity, the ability to reflect and recognise how individuals and their contexts connect with social and cultural understandings (Fook, 2004, p 18), to encourage a different view of child voice. It proposes that child voice within child protection processes is the product of a dynamic interplay of relationships that occurs within and outside of the child protection system. These relationships include those between children subject to child protection interventions and child protection practitioners; child protection practitioners and the organisations who employ them, thus providing the institutional settings for child protection practice; and children and the state, both the state as guardian and in the state’s role in providing resources to children and families (the welfare state). Both structural and cultural dimensions of relationships need to be analysed to recognise under which conditions children can express voice.

These relationships are centred on how opportunities for child voice within child protection are a policy and political choice. This politicisation of child voice needs to be articulated for a critical analysis of the complex variables that impact a child’s capacity to represent themself and have their views respected and acted upon. Clarity about the conditions under which child voice may occur produces a realistic understanding of how the complex set of relationships, outside of the child’s micro-system but deeply related to it, impact the implementation of children’s participation in their own safety. More importantly, it paves the way to understanding how the system can move beyond children’s voices just being heard.

The discussion of the various conditions needed for child voice, in the context of child protection, starts with three key observations. First, child voice is understood here as children having autonomy (the rights and conditions to self-govern) and agency (the capacity to act and create positive change in their lives), and that these are supported by the structures and processes of relevance to them, namely child protection processes and normative expectations around children and children’s rights. Secondly, child voice is qualitatively different to child participation. Even when children are involved in decisions about their lives, this is not always necessarily child voice, which requires systems to acknowledge children’s perspectives in a sustainable way.