CFCSA: A Comparative Analysis

Every piece of policy has been implemented due to varying social concerns, this is not different for the BC’s CFCSA and Sweden’s SSA. These two pieces of policy act as guidelines for society's concern or “social problem” that not all parents/guardians/caregivers know how to properly bring up children and what happens when parents do not meet the guidelines that the government has given. One of the reasons why these pieces of policy has been so that they can enforce a minimum standard for how children should be raised, to help keep children out of the way of harm or from developing in an unfavorable direction (CFCSA, 1996, s. 1; Social Services Act, 2001, p. 9). When examining any form of policy, it is important to understand how the policy

The assumption created by having any form of child welfare policy is that parents will encounter some form of hardship while raising their children one way or another. However, one could assume that it is because of this assumption that parents will encounter hardship that Sweden has turned to providing a universal model of services. One assumption that the SSA is intended to serve the best interest of the child although, it does not define what constitutes as the best interest of the child. Another assumption made by the SSA is a very base line of how children should be raised. Every municipality in Sweden is expected to provide the basic social services outlined in the act. This means that some municipalities may offer a wide holistic range of services well others may just off the bare none. The SSA assumes that every municipality will have the resources to serve any families that may be struggling. Well Sweden is a welfare state and provides universal services to its citizens, their child welfare policy is still very mush in a residual state. The SSA aims to “[serve], [supervise] and [discipline] the poor and the excluded in the community” (Hessle & Vinnerljung, 2018, p. 1) often placing a view of good authority and good or bad parents (Edvardsson, 2010, p. 1). The SSA itself states “the social welfare committee, may prohibit or limit the possibilities of a person who resides in the municipality receiving other persons’ children in their home” (Social Services Act, 2001, p. 9), meaning if a child is removed from their home they may be forced to leave the municipality that they currently live in thus forcing children to leave their school, friends, and any family that may still live in that municipality. This value goes against the idea of family preservation outlined in other Swedish policies such as the Parental Code (Föräldrabalken) (1949) which