The purpose of this study is to investigate whether, and in such cases how, children's rights have been strengthened by the implementation of the Convention on the Rights of the Child as a law in Sweden. The study also aims to analyze the similarities and differences between the Värmland and Stockholm regions. The main questions that will be answered are as follows:  - To what extent have child healthcare centers in each region adapted their activities since the enforcement of the Convention on the Rights of the Child as law?- To what extent are there resources for the implementation of the new law in child healthcare centers?- What level of knowledge is there about the new law (and what is considered to be the children's best interests) in child healthcare centers?- Is it possible to explain on the basis of implementation theory (want, can, and understand) the extent to which child healthcare centers have adapted their work and activities to accommodate the new law? This study is a qualitative case study using a common theoretical framework, in which we have chosen to interview care staff at child healthcare centers. The study chose the interviewees as they represent the final stage of policy implementation in the political governance chain. The analysis shows that the staff agreed that it is positive that the convention has been given a higher status since being enforced as a law. The result shows that the experience of implementing the new law differed between regions. Whether the newly enforced law strengthens the child's rights is, however, still difficult to assess as some interviewees find it difficult to interpret whether or not to refer to the Convention in certain contexts. This can be problematic, especially in situations with no open dialogue about the healthcare center’s' working methods and approach. This can result in a lack of practice when applying strategic methods (based on the legal principles of the Convention on the Rights of the Child) that aim to protect the rights of the child.

L’objet de cette étude est de mettre en évidence les traits distinctifs de l’institution que désigne le terme « entrée en vigueur de la loi ». Il s’agit d’un ensemble de règles et de pratiques correspondantes qui permettent aux acteurs du système juridique de déterminer avec précision le moment à compter duquel devient obligatoire toute nouvelle loi. Pour qu’une telle détermination soit possible, le système juridique doit consacrer au moins une règle de droit commun, à savoir une règle qui permet de déterminer, à défaut de disposition contraire, la date d’entrée en vigueur de toute nouvelle loi. La consécration d’une telle règle présuppose l’existence d’un critère qui permet de déterminer avec précision le moment où la procédure d’édiction chaque nouvelle loi est achevée. En droit positif français, ce critère est la promulgation. Pour rendre compte de cette fonction de la promulgation, il importe de distinguer entre deux séries de conditions d’entrée en vigueur : les conditions particulières, dont dépend l’entrée en vigueur des lois d’après les règles du droit positif, et les conditions générales, dont la réunion est nécessaire pour qu’il soit en premier lieu possible de consacrer des règles d’entrée en vigueur. Concernant les conditions particulières, l’étude des règles de droit commun montre que, contrairement à une idée communément admise, la publication n’est pas une condition nécessaire de l’entrée en vigueur des lois. S’agissant des conditions générales, il s’avère que l’institution de l’entrée en vigueur présuppose une conception volontariste de la loi et un haut degré de formalisation de la procédure de son édiction. / This study aims at identifying the distinctive features of what is commonly referred to as “entry into force of statutes”. This term refers to a nexus of rules and practices that enable the agents of a legal system to determine in a precise manner the moment every statute becomes legally binding. For that to be possible, there must be at least one general rule that applies to any statute lacking a commencement clause. The existence of such a rule depends on the presence of a criterion that allows establishing the precise moment every bill becomes an enacted statute. In France, the relevant criterion is the formal act, known as promulgation, by which the Head of State signs a bill into law. In order to fully grasp the function thus performed by the act of promulgation, a distinction must be made between two kinds of conditions that can be said to be necessary for a statute’s entry into force. On the one hand, there are the specific conditions set out by the relevant rules of a legal system. On the other hand, there are some more fundamental conditions that a legal system must necessarily meet in order to provide for a general rule governing the entry into force of its statutes. As regards the conditions set out by the relevant rules of the French legal system, it turns out that, contrary to a commonly held idea, the rules in question do not make prior publication a necessary condition for the entry into force of statutes. As regards the aforementioned necessary conditions, it appears that the relevant rules and practices presuppose a voluntarist conception of law and, subsequently, a high level of formalism in the procedure followed for the enactment of statutes.