Flyttningsförbudets förenlighet med barnets bästa – i ljuset av lex lilla hjärtat
(2024) LAGF03 20241Department of Law
Faculty of Law
- Abstract (Swedish)
- Inom den sociala barnavården och familjehemsplaceringar av barn finns det tre grundtankar, kontinuitet, flexibilitet och närhet. Vid en familjehemsplace-ring med stöd av lagen med särskilda bestämmelser om vård av unga ska vår-den vara inriktad på att den unga ska återförenas med sina föräldrar, men det finns undantag. Flyttningsförbudet stadgas i 24 § LVU och ger möjligheten att införa ett förbud för vårdnadshavaren att under en viss tid, eller tills vidare, föra bort barnet från familjehemmet.Fallet lilla hjärtat har haft påverkan på hur dessa förfaranden ska gå till. 20 september 2018 kom Kammarrätten i Jönköping fram till att en flicka som varit familjehemsplacerad med stöd av LVU skulle återförenas med sina föräldrar. Fyra månader... (More)
- Inom den sociala barnavården och familjehemsplaceringar av barn finns det tre grundtankar, kontinuitet, flexibilitet och närhet. Vid en familjehemsplace-ring med stöd av lagen med särskilda bestämmelser om vård av unga ska vår-den vara inriktad på att den unga ska återförenas med sina föräldrar, men det finns undantag. Flyttningsförbudet stadgas i 24 § LVU och ger möjligheten att införa ett förbud för vårdnadshavaren att under en viss tid, eller tills vidare, föra bort barnet från familjehemmet.Fallet lilla hjärtat har haft påverkan på hur dessa förfaranden ska gå till. 20 september 2018 kom Kammarrätten i Jönköping fram till att en flicka som varit familjehemsplacerad med stöd av LVU skulle återförenas med sina föräldrar. Fyra månader senare hittades flickan avliden. I juli 2022 trädde lagänd-ringarna i kraft under samlingsnamnet lex lilla hjärtat. Uppsatsen syftar till att undersöka om flyttningsförbudet i 24 § LVU är förenligt med barnets bästa. En huvudfrågeställning samt fyra underfrågor besvaras. Huvudfrågeställningen lyder följande: Hur förhåller sig flyttningsförbudet i 24 § LVU till principen om barnets bästa? Den besvaras genom att tillämpa en rättsdogmatisk metod ur ett kritiskt perspektiv. 24 § LVU tillåter att barnets bästa kan ges företräde framför vårdnadshavarens önskan att barnet ska flytta. 6 kap. 2 a § föräldrabalken fastställer att barnets bästa ska vara avgörande vid alla frågor som rör vårdnad, boende och umgänge. Forskare inom området menar likväl att barnets bästa som rättslig målsättning kan sägas innebära att ett beslut på bästa sätt ska tillgodose ett barns olika behov och intressen. Rättsläget kring hur barnets bästa ska tillämpas är oklart och det finns en ovisshet kring hur olika faktorer ska beaktas för att ge en rättvis bedömning. Barnets individuella förhållande och behov ska beaktas samtidigt som barnets intresse är av stor vikt. Slutsatsen i denna uppsats är att flyttningsförbudet inte är förenligt med barnets bästa då rättstillämpningen av principen är oklar samt vissa faktorer värderas mer än andra. (Less)
- Abstract
- In the field of child welfare there are three fundamental principles: continuity, flexibility and proximity. In the case of a family home placement according to The Care of Young Persons Act, the care must be aimed at reuniting the young person with their parents, but there are exceptions. Prohibition of relocation is regulated in section 24 of The Care of Young Persons Act and pro-vides the possibility of imposing a prohibition on the guardian removing the child from the family home for a certain period, or until further notice. The Case Lilla Hjärtat has had an impact on how these procedures should be carried out. On September 20, 2018, the Administrative Court of Appeal in Jönköping ruled that a girl who had been placed in a family home... (More)
- In the field of child welfare there are three fundamental principles: continuity, flexibility and proximity. In the case of a family home placement according to The Care of Young Persons Act, the care must be aimed at reuniting the young person with their parents, but there are exceptions. Prohibition of relocation is regulated in section 24 of The Care of Young Persons Act and pro-vides the possibility of imposing a prohibition on the guardian removing the child from the family home for a certain period, or until further notice. The Case Lilla Hjärtat has had an impact on how these procedures should be carried out. On September 20, 2018, the Administrative Court of Appeal in Jönköping ruled that a girl who had been placed in a family home should be reunited with her parents. Four months later, the girl was found deceased. In July 2022, the changes to the law came into force under the collective name Lex Lilla Hjärtat. The aim of this thesis is to investigate whether the prohibition of relocation in section 24 of The Care of Young Persons Act is in the child’s best interests. A main question and four sub questions are answered. The main question is: How does the prohibition of relocation in section 24 of The Care of Young Persons Act relate to the principle of the child’s best interests? The question is answered by applying a legal-dogmatic method from a critical perspective.
Section 24 of The Care of Young Persons Act allows the child’s best interests to take precedence over the guardian’s wish for the child to move. Chapter 6, section 2 a of the Children and Parents Code states that the child’s best interests shall be a decisive factor in all matters relating to custody of a child, residence and contact. Researchers in the field argue that the child’s best interests as a legal objective can be said to mean that a decision should best meet a child’s various needs and interests.The legal position regarding the application of law of the child’s best interests is unclear. There is uncertainty about how different factors should be considered to provide a fair assessment. The child’s individual circumstances and needs must be considered, while their best interests are of great importance. The conclusion in this thesis is that the prohibition of relocation is not compatible with the child’s best interests, since the application of law of the principle is unclear and some factors are valued more than others. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/9152759
- author
- Ericsson, Tora LU
- supervisor
- organization
- course
- LAGF03 20241
- year
- 2024
- type
- M2 - Bachelor Degree
- subject
- keywords
- Familjerätt, flyttningsförbud, barnets bästa, lex lilla hjärtat
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 9152759
- date added to LUP
- 2024-06-26 11:45:09
- date last changed
- 2024-06-26 11:45:09
@misc{9152759,
abstract = {{In the field of child welfare there are three fundamental principles: continuity, flexibility and proximity. In the case of a family home placement according to The Care of Young Persons Act, the care must be aimed at reuniting the young person with their parents, but there are exceptions. Prohibition of relocation is regulated in section 24 of The Care of Young Persons Act and pro-vides the possibility of imposing a prohibition on the guardian removing the child from the family home for a certain period, or until further notice. The Case Lilla Hjärtat has had an impact on how these procedures should be carried out. On September 20, 2018, the Administrative Court of Appeal in Jönköping ruled that a girl who had been placed in a family home should be reunited with her parents. Four months later, the girl was found deceased. In July 2022, the changes to the law came into force under the collective name Lex Lilla Hjärtat. The aim of this thesis is to investigate whether the prohibition of relocation in section 24 of The Care of Young Persons Act is in the child’s best interests. A main question and four sub questions are answered. The main question is: How does the prohibition of relocation in section 24 of The Care of Young Persons Act relate to the principle of the child’s best interests? The question is answered by applying a legal-dogmatic method from a critical perspective.
Section 24 of The Care of Young Persons Act allows the child’s best interests to take precedence over the guardian’s wish for the child to move. Chapter 6, section 2 a of the Children and Parents Code states that the child’s best interests shall be a decisive factor in all matters relating to custody of a child, residence and contact. Researchers in the field argue that the child’s best interests as a legal objective can be said to mean that a decision should best meet a child’s various needs and interests.The legal position regarding the application of law of the child’s best interests is unclear. There is uncertainty about how different factors should be considered to provide a fair assessment. The child’s individual circumstances and needs must be considered, while their best interests are of great importance. The conclusion in this thesis is that the prohibition of relocation is not compatible with the child’s best interests, since the application of law of the principle is unclear and some factors are valued more than others.}},
author = {{Ericsson, Tora}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Flyttningsförbudets förenlighet med barnets bästa – i ljuset av lex lilla hjärtat}},
year = {{2024}},
}