Child welfare’s blind spot in domestic-violence cases

Films that portray Norwegian child welfare inaccurately should face criticism, but that does not mean the system itself is beyond criticism. Child welfare services can make mistakes, including in cases involving domestic violence.

The experiences of survivors with the child welfare system vary widely, writes the leader of Help Me Stop the Violence, an organization for people affected by violence and their relatives. Some encounter skilled professionals who understand intimate-partner violence. Others feel that the violence is minimized or redefined as something else.

That blind spot is often missing from the debate over the Indian film “Mrs. Chatterjee vs. Norway.” The film depicts intimate-partner violence clearly, while a former child welfare leader described the case as “major conflicts between the parents.” The wording illustrates a documented problem: domestic violence disappears when professionals interpret it as conflict.

“

major conflicts between the parents

The consequences go beyond terminology. If violence is not identified as violence, children and the abused parent may fail to receive appropriate help. Such misjudgments can have decisive consequences for the care arrangements.

The article says this is not a marginal issue. In 2025, “a high level of conflict at home” appeared as one of the reasons in 110 of 505 investigations that ended with an application for measures to the Norwegian Child Welfare and Health Tribunal. In 42 cases, the recorded reason was “conflict between parents who do not live together.”

“

a high level of conflict at home

Oversight findings also point to broader weaknesses. The Norwegian Board of Health Supervision found legal violations or areas for improvement in 80 of 90 child welfare services it examined. Serious shortcomings also emerged in large municipalities such as Bergen and Trondheim.

The author argues that this makes stronger expertise essential. Yet Parliament limited a previously adopted competence requirement for child welfare services last year. The Ombudsperson for Children warned that the change could weaken quality, while nine of 24 written submissions, including those from 13 universities and colleges, clearly opposed it.

The debate about child welfare quality cannot be reduced to whether one film is accurate, the author concludes. The system must acknowledge that it can make mistakes, including in serious cases, and decide what to do with that knowledge.

“

conflict between parents who do not live together