Der er brug for en tænketank, der kan sætte fokus på børns ret til en tryg barndom
Therefore, there is a need for a think tank that can focus on children's right to a safe childhood.
Never before has so much been said about children's rights as in these years, and never before has there been committed as many systematic violations of children as are seen in these years.
The concepts of violence are diverse, and Stop Violence Against Children deals with all the concepts. And especially:
Physical violence
​
Physical violence is the violence that is perceived as the "real violence". Where you can see the bruises and the one that causes immediate physical pain.
​
Physical violence is illegal in Denmark and "simple violence" is punishable by a fine or up to 3 years in prison. Serious violence is punishable by up to 6 years 'imprisonment, and particularly serious violence with up to 10 years' imprisonment.
​
However, it is extremely difficult for the victims to get the Danish police to observe the victim's legal position, especially when violence is used against children.
Psychological violence
​
Psychological violence is about control, power and oppression.
​
The psychological violence is not always immediately visible to an outsider, as there are no bruises or broken bones. It is about direct or indirect threats or about humiliating or humiliating the child.
​
Psychological violence undermines the child's belief in his or her own abilities and degrades the child's identity, which is important in maintaining the oppression with which the child is controlled.
Psychological violence is illegal in Denmark, and is punishable by up to 3 years in prison, but it is extremely rare for professionals to see through that a child is exposed to psychological violence.
Structural violence
The structural violence is pervasive in our work, as the physical as well as the psychological violence leads to the structural violence, where authorities and courts assist in the violence perpetrated due to the lack of respect for human rights.
Structural violence is indirectly causing harm to other people by creating a duty to submit to the violence perpetrated. Authorities and courts indirectly punish the victim if the victim does not submit to the physical and mental abuse to which the victim is exposed.
Structural violence also constitutes the phenomenon of depriving the child / victim of his or her minimum of legal protection provided for in the human rights conventions, including fabricating conditions in the case files that are not truthful in order to achieve the desired verdict.
​
It is the prevailing structural violence that must be dealt with, as far too many children and families suffer irreparable damage in the Danish authorities 'and the courts' case processing.
Examples of structural violence in custody cases involving violence:
American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law
has committed a comprehensive report in 2017 "Overcoming Biased Views of Gender and
Victimhood in Custody Evaluations "When Domestic Violence Is Alleged", which outlines the problems in custody cases, which include violence and how one, as a professional, should deal with it.
​
The report highlights the bias on the part of the authorities and the courts, where the perpetrator is favored and the victim is violated.
​
The full report can be read here.
The Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW).
In 2016, CEDAW decided a case against Denmark in case no. 46/2012, section 5.5:
“The Committee notes the author's detailed allegations that during her cohabitation with S, after their separation and even after she moved to Austria, she was subjected to verbal and physical violence, harassment and stalking by S. and that OW was violently kidnapped by S. in Austria. The Committee further takes note of the author´s contention that the law enforcement authorities not only failed to protect her against the threats, stalking, harassment, and mental and physical abuse of S. but also discriminated against her as a foreign woman. Such as when she reported to the police one incident of a break-in into her home to the police by S. on 6. September 2010 and that the police did not take her version of events into account but instead arrested and detained her without due process for allegedly illegally taking OW out of the country, even though she was sole custody holder, and that the police refused to investigate her claim that S. has trespassed on her property and threatened her in her home. The Committee also takes note of the details provided by the author concerning the inhuman and degrading treatment meted out to her during her detention on 6 September 2010 such as the forced stripping and complete body search carried on her by a female officer in addition to the denial of the access to legal counsel. ”
The Danish state ignored the call from CEDAW, and the mother in the case has not seen her son since he was abducted on the streets of Austria.
The decision in its full length can be read here.
The practice outlined in this case is normal practice in the area of custody.
GREVIO - Group of Experts on Action against Violence against Women and Domestic Violence at the Council of Europe.
​
In 2017, GREVIO issued a report on custody and visitation cases in connection with the revision of the Parental Responsibility Act (2007), which resulted in a conclusion that victims of domestic violence lose custody and residence status over the child. The child is transferred to the abusive parent or placed outside the home, notwithstanding that the child could have had a good and safe upbringing with the non-violent parent.
​
GREVIO's report can be read in its entirety here .
The United Nations Children's Committee "(COMMITTEE ON THE RIGHTS OF THE CHILD).
​
Since 2005, the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child has raised serious criticisms against Denmark for the careless handling of children and their families' rights in connection with the placement of children outside the home.
​
Despite the fact that the UN has continuously raised serious criticism of Denmark, the Danish state has only worsened legal security in the placement area with irreparable damage as a result of the many children and families who are exposed to the state's unjustified interference with the right to family life.
The United Nations Children's Committee "(COMMITTEE ON THE RIGHTS OF THE CHILD).
"Concluding observations - Denmark, Thirty-ninth session" of 23 November 2005:
deals with the increasing number of forced placements in Denmark, and the lack of legal certainty ..
And
Section 33 concludes, among other things, that "a thorough assessment of the need for" placement of children outside the home does not always take place in Denmark, and that the contact between the forcibly placed child and the parents is "very limited".
And
Section 34 recommends, among other things, that the Danish authorities increase their efforts to provide support to the children and their parents in order to limit the number of forced placements.
And
The United Nations Guidelines for the Alternative Care of Children of February 24, 2010.
The UN Guidelines for the Alternative Care of Children of 24 February 2010, Section 11 (a) (3), establish the principle that the placement of children outside their families must be organized in order to maximize the possibility of the child returning. to his or her family. The following sections describe the efforts that authorities need to make to support families in caring for their own children.
In point a) in the section on "Children deprived of a family environment" in "Final observations" of the Committee on the Rights of the Child concerning Denmark of 4 February 2011, the Committee recommends that the Danish authorities "offer adequate support" to a greater extent "( "provide appropriate support") to families to limit the extent of placement of children outside the home.
Guidelines from the UN can be read here.
​
The United Nations Children's Committee "(COMMITTEE ON THE RIGHTS OF THE CHILD) again raised serious criticism in" Concluding observations - Denmark "of 29 September 2017.
The report again criticized the increasing number of involuntary placements where this was not necessary and the lack of legal certainty:
F. Family environment and alternative care (arts. 5, 9-11, 18 (1) and (2), 20-21, 25 and 27 (4))
Children deprived of a family environment
26. While noting with appreciation that the State party is allocating significant resources to preventive measures to avoid out of home placements of children and that there has been an increase in placements of children who cannot stay with their families into foster homes, the Committee, however , is concerned that:
(a) Many children who cannot stay with their families continue to be placed in alternative care institutions, especially children with disabilities;
(b) Children placed in alternative care institutions are often required to move from one institution to another;
(c) According to recent findings, the Municipality of Copenhagen made certain decisions of placing children into alternative care without legal basis, without party consultation, without providing complaint instruction, without assessment regarding the child's right to contact or without action plan for the child, and that such mismanagement of cases of placing children into alternative care are reportedly also taking place in other municipalities;
(d) Children are not sufficiently heard in alternative care cases, including in Greenland;
(e) The living conditions in alternative care institutions may not always be in compliance with the Convention;
(f) While the use of restraint by staff in alternative care institutions may only be employed in exceptional circumstances, it is not strictly limited in practice, and children against whom restraint is used in foster homes have no complaints mechanisms.
​
The report can be read in its entirety here.
Example of structural violence in forced placement cases:
A very classic example of the structural violence perpetrated against families in Denmark.
In an anonymised police report of 8 June 2020, which can be downloaded here , you can get an insight into how forced removals - and forced adoptions - are committed in the Danish state.
This form of structural violence is no longer a private problem in the family, but a societal problem, as we see that it is the state itself that creates "vulnerable children and young people", which is a heavy item in Danish society.
​
The case includes a decision from Guldborgsund Municipality on forced adoption of a future child. In order to complete this decision, facts of the case are fabricated. As the family demands its right under the law, government officials attack the party representative, where he is falsely reported to the police with allegations of (fictitious) criminal acts.
​
As the authorities still cannot get hold of the child, the authorities provide incorrect information to the police, who assist them in - brutally - picking up the infant. During the brutal act, they encounter the infant's aunt, who is under the age of 18, where authorities and police choose to detain the aunt. During this deprivation of liberty, she is threatened by the police to provide information about her family.
​
Many people are of the opinion that cases like this are isolated, they are not. Cases like this constitute "normal" in the field of placement, which has resulted in thousands of devastated children and families.
There may be. inspiration is obtained in the police report for others who have been subjected to this treatment, and inspiration can be obtained for authorities not to commit these acts.
From a healthy and happy working mother to an early retiree with a broken family.
A tale of a placement that should have been avoided and which has resulted in a broken family.
​
An unjustified dismissal, which is later won in court, resulted in the destruction of the entire family so that the criteria for obtaining an early retirement pension were met.
The consequence of structural violence:
The same number of placements of children over the past 100 years with the exception of World War II.
​
Number of children to be removed from their parents is put in system, as seen by research in the field.
The Social Democratic Government 2019 - wants to increase the number of children to be removed from their families, and figures have already been set at: 50,000 children despite the fact that the government does not know how many children are born and of which how many children who are in urgent need of state intervention in their inalienable right to family life.
​
By removing children from their families who do not need to be removed, you automatically create a treatment-requiring underclass that is to the great detriment of those affected, but also to a small country like Denmark.
​
Although Danish society has become significantly richer and with better health in the last 100 years, the number of children placed outside their homes is consistently 1% - 1.2%. The only time period that has been a difference was during World War II from 1939 - 1945.
The information can be found in the book "Children's laws and social pedagogy through 100 years", written by the Danish professor Inge M. Bryderup. Link
Center for Clinical Research and Prevention of 31 October 2019:
And
So prevalent is mental dissatisfaction (School Children Survey) 23.6% of girls and 17.3% of boys are stressed, have three + indicators of mental dissatisfaction 8.1% of girls and 4.2% of boys have five + indicators of mental dissatisfaction , a very serious degree of dissatisfaction.
And
Read the full report here .
Children's Terms: Stop the tsunami of mental dissatisfaction among children and young people of 2 April 2019:
The number of children who become unhappy and become mentally ill is rising sharply. A future government should come up with an ambitious action plan as a lifeline for the thousands of children who are at risk of anxiety, loneliness and mental illness.
And
The article can be read in its entirety here .
Seven out of ten placed children will not receive the final examination on 9 June 2020:
Figures from KL show that seven out of ten placed children do not receive a graduation certificate from primary and lower secondary school, but this is only the case for one in ten non-placed children.
[..]
Former inmates are also overrepresented in the homelessness and unemployment statistics.
And
The article can be read in its entirety here.
Children are deliberately inflicted brain damage by separation from their parents.
And
It is well known in research that children suffer brain damage when they are removed from their primary caregiver. For infants, their primary caregiver is the infant's mother.
This means that every time a municipality decides that a child must be forcibly placed, the municipality in question also decides that the state must inflict brain damage on the child, which can lead to a deteriorating childhood, a reduced schooling and a reduced adult life.
This is one of the considerations behind Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, and one of the reasons why a child may only be forcibly removed if the harm inflicted on the child exceeds the harm caused by the child being separated from his. primary caregiver.
And
You can download the extensive research on brain damage by separation from the child's primary caregiver here.
And
And