Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T17:13:18.763Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Parenting Support Policy in Finland: Responsibility and Competence as Key Attributes of Good Parenting in Parenting Support Projects

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 February 2018

Ella Sihvonen
Ella Sihvonen*
Affiliation:
Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Social Research, University of Helsinki E-mail: ella.sihvonen@helsinki.fi
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In Finland, parenting-related anxiety increased in the 1990s during a deep economic recession and subsequent widespread cutbacks to family services. Despite these cutbacks, resources allocated to services underlining the role of parents – namely, parenting support – increased, manifesting in the establishment of family support projects in the 2000s. Employing positioning theory and pragmatic modalities, I explore how key attributes of good parenting – responsibility and competence – are discussed within family support projects (n = 310). Given discussions regarding the relationship between parenting-related anxiety and the increasing number of parenting-related experts, this article explores parents’ positions within such discussions and overall parenting support in Finland. The analysis of projects clarifies the role of the parenting-related experts, but also provides a nuanced view of the position of parents. In some projects, for instance, parents are positioned as experts whose parenting responsibilities and competence are strengthened within peer-parent relationships and shared within the surrounding community.

Keywords

Competenceparenting supportpragmatic modalitiessubject positionresponsibilisation
Type
Themed Section on Parenting Support in the Nordic Countries: Is there a Specific Nordic Model?
Information
Social Policy and Society , Volume 17 , Issue 3 , July 2018 , pp. 443 - 456
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alasuutari, P. (1996) Toinen tasavalta: Suomi 1946–1994, Tampere: Vastapaino.Google Scholar
Anttonen, A. and Sipilä, J. (2012) ‘Universalism in the British and Scandinavian social policy debates’, in Anttonen, A., Häikiö, L. and Stefánsson, K. (eds.), Welfare State, Universalism and Diversity, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 16–41.Google Scholar
Atkinson, P. and Coffey, A. (1998) ‘Analysing documentary realities’, in Silverman, D. (ed.), Qualitative Research. Theory, Method and Practice, London & Thousand Oaks & New Delhi: Sage, 56–75.Google Scholar
Autto, J. M. and Törrönen, J. (2017) ‘Justifications of citizens’ subject positions in public debates on welfare’, Acta Sociologica, 60, 1, 61–73.Google Scholar
Bardy, M., Salmi, M. and Heino, T. (2001) Mikä lapsiamme uhkaa? Suuntaviivoja 2000-luvun lapsipoliittiseen keskusteluun, Raportteja 263, Helsinki: Stakes.Google Scholar
Bowen, G. A (2009) ‘Document analysis as a qualitative research method’, Qualitative Research Journal, 9, 2, 27–40.Google Scholar
Child Welfare Act (2007) No. 417/2007; amendments up to 1292/2013 included, Ministry of Social Affairs and Health, Finland.Google Scholar
Daly, M. (2013a) ‘Parenting support in politics in Europe’, Families, Relationships and Societies, 2, 2, 159–74.Google Scholar
Daly, M. (2013b) ‘Parenting support: another gender-related policy illusion in Europe?’, Women's Studies International Forum, 41, 223–30.Google Scholar
Daly, M (2015) ‘Parenting support as policy field. An analytic framework’, Social Policy and Society, 14, 4, 597–608.Google Scholar
Daly, M. and Bray, R. (2015) ‘Parenting support in England: the bedding down of a new policy’, Social Policy and Society, 14, 4, 633–44.Google Scholar
Davies, B. and Harré, R. (1999) ‘Reflexive positioning: autobiography’, in Harré, R. and van Langenhove, L. (eds.), Positioning Theory. Moral Context of Intentional Action, Oxford: Balckwell, 32–52.Google Scholar
Faircloth, C., Hoffman, D. M. and Layne, L.L. (eds.) (2013a) Parenting in Global Perspective: Negotiating Ideologies of Kinship, Self and Politics, London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faircloth, C., Hoffman, D. M. and Layne, L. L. (2013b) ‘Introduction’, in Faircloth, C., Hoffman, D. M. and Layne, L. L. (eds.), Parenting in Global Perspective: Negotiating Ideologies of Kinship, Self and Politics, London: Routledge, 1–18.Google Scholar
Faircloth, C. and Murray, M. (2014) ‘Parenting: kinship, expertise, and anxiety’, Journal of Family Issues, 36, 9, 1115–29.Google Scholar
Furedi, F. (2002) Paranoid Parenting. Why Ignoring the Experts May be the Best for your Child, Chicago, IL: Chicago Review Press.Google Scholar
Gillies, V. (2011) ‘From function to competence: engaging with the new politics of family’, Sociological Research Online, 16, 4, 30 November, www.socresonline.org.uk/16/4/11.html [accessed 05.12.2017].Google Scholar
Gíslason, I. V. and Símonardóttir, S. (2018) ‘Mothering and gender equality in Iceland: irreconcilable opposites?’, Social Policy and Society, doi: 10.1017/S1474746417000525.Google Scholar
Greimas, A. J. (1980) Strukturaalista semantiikkaa [Sémantique structurale: Recherche et méthode], Helsinki: Gaudeamus.Google Scholar
Harré, R. and van Langenhove, L. (eds.) (1999) Positioning Theory. Moral Context of Intentional Action, Oxford: Balckwell.Google Scholar
Heiskala, R. (2006) ‘Kansainvälisen toimintaympäristön muutos ja Suomen yhteiskunnallinen murros’, in Heiskala, R. and Luhtakallio, E. (eds.), Uusi jako: Miten Suomesta tuli kilpailukyky-yhteiskunta, Tampere: Vastapaino, 14–42.Google Scholar
Heiskala, R. and Luhtakallio, E. (eds.) (2006a) Uusi jako: Miten Suomesta tuli kilpailukyky-yhteiskunta, Tampere: Vastapaino.Google Scholar
Heiskala, R. and Luhtakallio, E. (2006b) ‘Johdanto: Suunnittelutaloudesta kilpailukyky-yhteiskuntaan?’, in Heiskala, R. and Luhtakallio, E. (eds.), Uusi jako: Miten Suomesta tuli kilpailukyky-yhteiskunta, Tampere: Vastapaino, 7–13.Google Scholar
Hollway, W. (1984) Gender differences and the product of subjectivity, in Henriques, J., Hollway, W., Urwin, C., Venn, L. and Walkerdine, V. (eds.) Changing the Subject: Psychology, Social Regulation and Subjectivity, London: Methuen, 227–63.Google Scholar
Jallinoja, R. (2006) Perheen vastaisku, Helsinki: Gaudeamus.Google Scholar
Julkunen, R. (2001) Suunnanmuutos 1990-luvun sosiaalipoliittinen reformi Suomessa, Tampere: Vastapiano.Google Scholar
Julkunen, R. (2006) Kuka vastaa? Hyvinvointivaltion rajat ja julkinen vastuu, Helsinki: Stakes.Google Scholar
Kananen, J. (2014) The Nordic Welfare State in Three Eras. From Emancipation to Discipline, Farnham: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Kautto, M., Heikkilä, M., Hvinden, B., Marklund, S. and Plough, N. (eds.) (1999) Nordic Social Policy: Changing Welfare State, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Knijn, T. and Hopman, M. (2015) ‘Parenting support in the Dutch ‘participation society’’, Social Policy and Society, 14, 4, 645–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuronen, M. and Lahtinen, P. (2011) ‘Supporting families: the role of family work in child welfare’, in Forsberg, H. and Kröger, T. (eds.), Social Work and Child Welfare Politics. Through Nordic Lenses, Bristol: The Polity Press, 11–28.Google Scholar
Lee, E., Bristow, J., Faircloth, C. and Macvarish, J. (eds.) (2014) Parenting Culture Studies, Basingstoke: Palgrave.Google Scholar
Lee, E. (2014a) ‘Introduction’, in Lee, E., Bristow, J., Faircloth, C. and Macvarish, J. (eds.), Parenting Culture Studies, Basingstoke: Palgrave, 1–24.Google Scholar
Lee, E. (2014b) ‘Experts and parenting culture’, in Lee, E., Bristow, J., Faircloth, C. and Macvarish, J. (eds.), Parenting Culture Studies, Basingstoke: Palgrave, 51–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Littmarck, S., Lind, J. and Sandin, B. (2018) ‘Negotiating parenting support: welfare politics in Sweden between the 1960s and the 2000s’, Social Policy and Society, doi: 10.1017/S1474746417000574.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lundqvist, Å. (2015) ‘Parenting support in Sweden: new policies in old settings’, Social Policy and Society, 14, 4, 657–68.Google Scholar
Martin, C. (2015) ‘Parenting support in France: policy in an ideological battlefield’, Social Policy and Society, 14, 4, 609–20.Google Scholar
Ostner, I. and Stolberg, C. (2015) ‘Investing in children, monitoring parents: parenting support in the changing German welfare state’, Social Policy and Society, 14, 4, 621– 32.Google Scholar
Pierson, P. (2001) The New Politics of the Welfare State, Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prior, L. (2003) Using Documents in Social Research, London: Sage.Google Scholar
Rantala, K. and Sulkunen, P. (eds.) (2006) Projektiyhteiskunnan kääntöpuolia, Helsinki: Gaudeamus.Google Scholar
Satka, M. (2010) ‘Varhainen puuttuminen ja sosiaalityö’, in Laitinen, M. and Pohjola, A. (eds.), Asiakkuus sosiaalityössä, Helsinki: Gaudeamus, 181–218.Google Scholar
Sihvonen, E. (2008) ‘Lasten ja nuorten pahoinvointi ja vanhemmuus mediateksteissä’, in Autio, M., Eräranta, K. and Myllyniemi, S. (eds.), Polarisoituva nuoruus? Nuorten elinolot vuosikirja, Helsinki: Nuorisotutkimusverkosto/Nuorisoasiain neuvottelukunta, 170–79.Google Scholar
Sihvonen, E. (forthcoming) ‘Early interventionist parenting support: the case study of Finland’, Families, Relationships and Societies, https://doi.org/10.1332/204674316X14552878034703.Google Scholar
Sulkunen, P. (2009) The Saturated Society. Governing Risk and Lifestyle in Consumer Culture, London: Sage.Google Scholar
Sulkunen, P. and Törrönen, J. (1997a) ‘The production of values: the concept of modality in textual discourse analysis’, Semiotica, 133, 1–2, 43–69.Google Scholar
Sulkunen, P. and Törrönen, J. (1997b) ‘Arvot ja modaalisuus sosiaalisen todellisuuden rakentamisessa’, in Sulkunen, P. and Törrönen, J. (eds.), Semioottisen sosiologian näkökulmia. Sosiaalisen todellisuuden rakentuminen ja ymmärrettävyys, Helsinki: Gaudeamus, 72–95.Google Scholar
Törrönen, J. (2001) ‘The concept of subject position in empirical social research’, Journal of the Theory of Social Behaviour, 31, 3, 313–29.Google Scholar
Törrönen, J. and Maunu, A. (2007) Light transgression and heavy sociability: alcohol in young adult Finns’ narratives of a night out, Addiction Research and Theory, 15, 4, 365–81.Google Scholar
van Langenhove, L. and Harré, R. (1994) Cultural Stereotypes and Positioning Theory, Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 24, 4, 359–372.Google Scholar
van Langenhove, L. and Harré, R. (1999) ‘Introducing positioning theory’, in Harré, R. and van Langenhove, L. (eds.), Positioning Theory. Moral Context of Intentional Action, Oxford: Balckwell, 14–31.Google Scholar
Wesley, J. (2014) ‘The qualitative analysis of political documents’, in Kaal, B., Maks, I. and van Elfrinkhof, A. (eds.), From Text to Political Positions. Text Analysis across Disciplines, DAPSAC, 55, 135–62.Google Scholar
Widding, U. (2018) ‘Parental determinism in the Swedish strategy for parenting support’, Social Policy and Society, doi: 10.1017/S1474746417000513.Google Scholar
Yesilova, K. (2009) Ydinperheen politiikka, Helsinki: Gaudeamus.Google Scholar