References

• Bartelink, C., van Yperen, T. A., Ten Berge, I. J., de Kwaadsteniet, L., & Witteman, C. L. M. (2014). Agreement on child maltreatment decisions: A nonrandomized study on the effects of structured decision-making. Child & Youth Care Forum, 43(5), 639–654. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10566-014-9259-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berrick, J. D., Dickens, J., Pösö, T., & Skivenes, M. (2017). A cross-country comparison of child welfare systems and workers' responses to children appearing to be at risk or in need of help. Child Abuse Review, 26(4), 305–319. https://doi.org/10.1002/car.2485
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berrick, J. D., Dickens, J., Pösö, T., & Skivenes, M. (2020). Are child protection workers and judges in alignment with citizens when considering interventions into a family? A cross-country study of four jurisdictions. Children and Youth Services Review, 108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2019.104562
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berrick, J. D., Gilbert, N., & Skivenes, M. (2023). Child protection systems across the world. In J. D. Berrick, N. Gilbert, & M. Skivenes (Eds.), Oxford handbook of child protection systems. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bjorvatn, A., Magnussen, A.-M., & Wallander, L. (2020). Law and medical practice: A comparative vignette survey of cardiologists in Norway and Denmark. SAGE Open Medicine, 8, 205031212094621. https://doi.org/10.1177/2050312120946215
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2022). Thematic analysis: A practical guide. SAGE.
   Google Scholar
• Burns, K., Pösö, T., & Skivenes, M. (2016). Child welfare removals by the state: A cross-country analysis of decision-making systems. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190459567.001.0001
   Google Scholar
• Centre for Research on Discretion and Paternalism. (2019). Requirements for judgments in care order decisions in 8 countries. Centre for Research on Discretion and Paternalism. https://www.discretion.uib.no/formal-legal-requirements-for-judgments-in-care-order-decisions-in-8-countries/.
   Google Scholar
• Centre for Research on Discretion and Paternalism. (2021). Description of coding results—216 care order cases concerning newborn children. Centre for Research on Discretion and Paternalism. https://discretion.uib.no/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/Newborn-Description-of-coding-results.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Dalgleish, L. I. (2003). Risks, needs and consequences. In M. C. Calder, & S. Hackett (Eds.), Assessment in child care: Using and developing frameworks for practice (pp. 86–99). Russel House Pub.
   Google Scholar
• Danner, R. A., Bernal, M.-L. H., & American Association of Law Libraries. (1994). Introduction to foreign legal systems. Oceana Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Dickens, J., Masson, J., Garside, L., Young, J., & Bader, K. (2019). Courts, care proceedings and outcomes uncertainty: The challenges of achieving and assessing “good outcomes” for children after child protection proceedings. Child & Family Social Work, 24(4), 574–581. https://doi.org/10.1111/cfs.12638
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Falconer, R., & Shardlow, S. M. (2018). Comparing child protection decision-making in England and Finland: Supervised or supported judgement? Journal of Social Work Practice, 32(2), 111–124. https://doi.org/10.1080/02650533.2018.1438996
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fluke, J. D., López, M. L., Benbenishty, R., Knorth, E. J., & Baumann, D. J. (eds.). (2020). Decision-Making and judgment in child welfare and protection: Theory. In Research, and practice (1st ed.). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190059538.001.0001
   Google Scholar
• Fylkesnemnda for barnevern og sosiale saker. (2023). Årsrapport Årsregnskap 2022. Barneverns- og helsenemnda. https://www.bvhn.no/aarsrapporter.6485272-568824.html.
   Google Scholar
• Galligan, D. J. (1987). Discretionary powers: A legal study of official discretion. Clarendon Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gilbert, N., Parton, N., & Skivenes, M. (2011). Changing patterns of response and emerging orientations. In N. Gilbert, N. Parton, & M. Skivenes (Eds.), Child protection systems: International trends and orientations (1st ed., pp. 243–257). Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Helland, H. S. (2021). In the best interest of the child? Justifying decisions on adoption from care in the Norwegian supreme court. The International Journal of Children’s Rights, 29(3), 609–639. https://doi.org/10.1163/15718182-29030004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Helland, H. S. (2021). Reasoning between rules and discretion: A comparative study of the normative platform for best interest decision-making on adoption in England and Norway. International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family, 35(1), ebab036. https://doi.org/10.1093/lawfam/ebab036
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Höjer, I., & Pösö, T. (In press). Child protection in Finland and Sweden. In J. D. Berrick, N. Gilbert, & M. Skivenes (Eds.), International Handbook of Child Protection Systems. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Juhasz, I. B. (2020). Child welfare and future assessments – An analysis of discretionary decision-making in newborn removals in Norway. Children and Youth Services Review, 116), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.105137
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keddell, E. (2023). On decision variability in child protection: Respect, interactive universalism and ethics of care. Ethics and Social Welfare, 17(0), 4–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/17496535.2022.2073381
   Google Scholar
• Eesti Kohtud. (n.d.). The Estonian court system | Eesti Kohtud. Retrieved May 5, 2023, from https://www.kohus.ee/en/estonian-courts/estonian-court-system.
   Google Scholar
• Križ, K., & Skivenes, M. (2013). Systemic differences in views on risk: A comparative case vignette study of risk assessment in England, Norway and the United States (California). Children and Youth Services Review, 35(11), 1862–1870. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2013.09.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krutzinna, J., & Skivenes, M. (2021). Judging parental competence: A cross-country analysis of judicial decision makers' written assessment of mothers' parenting capacities in newborn removal cases. Child & Family Social Work, 26(11), 50–60. https://doi.org/10.1111/cfs.12788
   Google Scholar
• Langvatn, S. A. (2016). Should international courts Use public reason? Ethics & International Affairs, 30(3), 355–377. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0892679416000265
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Larsson, B., & Jacobsson, B. (2013). Discretion in the “backyard of Law”: case handling of debt relief in Sweden. Professions and Professionalism, 3(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.7577/pp.438
   Google Scholar
• Lov om barnevern (Barnevernsloven). (2021). https://lovdata.no/dokument/NL/lov/1992-07-17-100.
   Google Scholar
• Løvlie, A. G. (2023). Evidence in Norwegian child protection interventions – analysing cases of familial violence. Child & Family Social Work, 28(1), 236–247. https://doi.org/10.1111/cfs.12956
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Løvlie, A. G., & Skivenes, M. (2021). Justifying interventions in Norwegian child protection. Nordic Journal on Law and Society, 4), https://doi.org/10.36368/njolas.v4i02.178
   Google Scholar
• Luhamaa, K., McEwan-Strand, A., Ruiken, B., Skivenes, M., & Wingens, F. (2021). Services and support for mothers and newborn babies in vulnerable situations: A study of eight European jurisdictions. Children and Youth Services Review, 120(1), 105762. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.105762
   Google Scholar
• Magruder, J., & Berrick, J. D. (2023). A longitudinal investigation of infants and out-of-home care. Journal of Public Child Welfare, 17(0), 390–407. https://doi.org/10.1080/15548732.2022.2036294
   Google Scholar
• McEwan-Strand, A., & Skivenes, M. (2020). Children’s capacities and role in matters of great significance for them. International Journal of Children’s Rights, 28(3), 632–665. https://doi.org/10.1163/15718182-02803006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Molander, A. (2016). Discretion in the welfare state: Social rights and professional judgment. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Pösö, T., & Huhtanen, R. (2016). Removals of children in Finland: A mix of voluntary and involuntary decisions. In K. Burns, T. Pösö, & M. Skivenes (Eds.), Child welfare removals by the state: A cross-country analysis of decision-making systems. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190459567.003.0002
   Google Scholar
• Raaphorst, N. J. (2021). Administrative justice in street-level decision making: Equal treatment and responsiveness. In J. Tomlinson, R. Thomas, M. Hertogh, & R. Kirkham (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of administrative justice (pp. 1–30). Oxford University Press. https://hdl.handle.net/1887/139073.
   Google Scholar
• Rothstein, B. (1998). Just institutions matter: The moral and political logic of the universal welfare state. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511598449
   Google Scholar
• Ruiken, B. (2022). Analyzing decision-maker’s justifications of care orders for newborn children: Equal and individualized treatment. Journal of Public Child Welfare, 0(0), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/15548732.2022.2158990
   Google Scholar
• Skivenes, M., & Tonheim, M. (2017). Deliberative decision-making on the Norwegian county social welfare board: The experiences of expert and Lay members. Journal of Public Child Welfare, 11(1), 108–132. https://doi.org/10.1080/15548732.2016.1242447
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Statistics Estonia. (2022, December 5). RV021: POPULATION, 1 JANUARY by Sex, Year and Age group. Statistical Database. Statistics Estonia. https://andmed.stat.ee/en/stat/rahvastik__rahvastikunaitajad-ja-koosseis__rahvaarv-ja-rahvastiku-koosseis/RV021/table/tableViewLayout2.
   Google Scholar
• van den Bogaard, R.-M., Horta, A. C., Van Doren, W., Desmet, E., & Valcke, A. (2022). Procedural (in)justice for EU citizens moving to Belgium: An inquiry into municipal registration practices. Citizenship Studies, 26, 995–1010. https://doi.org/10.1080/13621025.2022.2137944
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wallander, L., & Molander, A. (2014). Disentangling professional discretion: A conceptual and methodological approach. Professions and Professionalism, 4(3), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.7577/pp.808
   Google Scholar
• Ward, H., Brown, R., & Hyde-Dryden, G. (2014). Assessing parental capacity to change when children are on the edge of care: An overview of current research evidence (p. 193). Department for Education.
   Google Scholar
• Westerman, P. C. (2015). The uneasy marriage between Law and Equality. Laws, 4(1), 82–90. https://doi.org/10.3390/laws4010082
   Google Scholar