The purpose of this essay was to enhance the understanding and knowledge about phenomenon access support. Access support means that a third person (contact person) must be present during access visits between a child and its parent, if it is necessary for the child’s security or because the child needs support. The study was based on qualitative interviews with four contact persons and two professional social workers, whose main task have been to support and, partially, coordinate the work of contact persons. During the interviews I put the focus on participant’s experiences and thoughts about the phenomenon access support. Two theoretical perspectives were used to analyze the empirical material. These were an experiential perspective and role perspective. The results showed that being a contact person required certain personal qualities and strategies for managing different situations during access. Generally, the access situations are often affected by problems between divorced parents and the lack of cooperation with other institutions, especially with the court. Parents and children can have different expectations of access support. Nevertheless, participants find the work as access support meaningful and valuable in terms of life experience.

Syftet med denna studie var att undersöka familjerättssekreterares upplevelse av att verkställa dom om umgänge med umgängesstöd där det förekommit våld. Genom tre kvalitativa fokusgruppsintervjuer med verksamma familjerättssekreterare med minst tre års erfarenhet har ett antal frågeställningar besvarats. Frågeställningarna handlar om barns rättigheter och åsikter och hur dessa tar sig uttryck i utredningar gällande umgänge samt i efterföljande dom från tingsrätten, i relation till hur det påverkar verkställandet av umgänge med umgängesstöd utifrån familjerättssekreterares uppdrag. Intervjumaterialet har därefter analyserats utifrån tidigare forskning om verkställande av umgänge utifrån barnets bästa när det förekommit våld kopplat till Michael Lipskys teori om gräsrotsbyråkrater samt teori om barnets perspektiv. Resultatet visar att familjerättssekreterare upplever det tidskrävande och svårt att verkställa umgänge med umgängesstöd när det förkommit våld, särskilt då barnet i den familjerättsliga utredningen utryckt en ovilja till att träffa den våldsutövande föräldern. Informanterna uttrycker att barnets åsikter framkommer i utredning och lyfts fram i risk- och konsekvensanalys, men att det i dom från tingsrätten sällan framgår hur det blir utifrån barnets perspektiv att mot sin vilja tvingas träffa en våldsutövande förälder. Barnets bästa upplevs av informanterna fokusera på föräldrarnas rätt att träffa barnet. Vidare framkom det att informanterna upplever att de hamnar i en svår situation där umgänge med umgängesstöd ska ske mot barnets vilja, både känslomässigt i förhållande till barnet, men också i relation till vårdnadshavares ansvar att skydda sitt barn från att fara illa samtidigt som en dom ska följas för att inte få andra oönskade effekter. Slutligen visar resultatet att möjligheterna för familjerättssekreterare att verkställa dom om umgänge med umgängesstöd där det förekommit våld är begränsade och upplevs inte tillfredsställande. / The purpose of this study was to examine the experience of family law representatives in enforcing access orders with access support where violence has occurred. Through three qualitative focus group interviews with practicing family law caseworkers with at least three years of experience, a number of questions were answered. The questions concern children's rights and views and how these are expressed in investigations concerning access and in the subsequent judgment of the district court, in relation to how this affects the enforcement of access with access support from the perspective of the family law caseworkers mission. The interview material was then analysed on the basis of previous research on the enforcement of access in the best interests of the child in cases of violence linked to Michael Lipsky's theory of grassroots bureaucrats and the theory of the best interests of the child. The results show that family law caseworkers find it time-consuming and difficult to enforce access with access support in cases of violence, especially when the child has expressed a reluctance to meet the violent parent in the family law investigation. Informants expressed that the child's views are expressed in the investigation and highlighted in the risk and impact assessment, but that it is rarely clear from the judgment of the district court what it would be like from the child's perspective to be forced to meet an abusive parent against his or her will. The best interests of the child are perceived by the informants to focus on the parents' right to see the child. Furthermore, it emerged that the informants feel that they end up in a difficult situation where access with access support has to be against the child's will, both emotionally in relation to the child, but also in relation to the guardians' responsibility to protect their child from harm while at the same time following a judgment so as not to have other undesirable effects. Finally, the results show that the possibilities for family law caseworkers to enforce access orders with access support where there has been violence are limited and not perceived as satisfactory.

In 2020, approximately 6900 children in Sweden were relevant for investigation of custody disputes. During the same year, 1802 court decisions were enforced regarding supervision by a contact person. Previous research has shown that children often have a lack of participation and opportunity to influence in these cases. It has also shown that parental rights and the child´s need for protection often outweigh the child´s expressed will. The aim of this study was to investigate children´s participation in the district court´s judgments regarding supervision by a contact person. What an impact the child´s will have and how factors such as age, risks and their best interest affect children´s ability to be involved. Through a qualitative content analysis, nine judgments from various district courts in Sweden during 2018-2021 have been selected. The material was then analyzed with the help of social constructivist theory and Roger Hart´s ladder of participation. The study shows that in six out of nine judgments, children are involved based on different levels and that 44% of the judgments are in accordance with the child´s expressed will. However, it has been difficult to read out how the child´s will has actually had a bearing on the verdict. The result also shows that factors such as age, risks and the best interests of the child affects the child´s ability to participate. In cases where the district court has not reported the child´s will or participation, no explanation or clarification is given as to why it is so.

Följande studie är en kvalitativ dokumentstudie vars syfte är att genom en diskursanalys utifrån Ernesto Laclau och Chantal Mouffe’s (2001; 2008) diskursteori utforska på vilket sätt barnet, dess delaktighet och dess bästa framställs i tingsrätten. Studien har undersökt detta i domar från tingsrätten gällande umgänge med umgängesstöd enligt 6 kap. §15c föräldrabalken (FB) (SFS 1949:381). De juridiska ramar gällande barnet, som finns i föräldrabalken och barnkonventionen (Lag [SFS 2018:1197] om Förenta nationernas konvention om barnets rättigheter), tyder på att barnet besitter en stark ställning gentemot vuxna, men forskning visar på att barn sällan får möjlighet att delta och sällan får sin vilja hörd. Studiens empiriska material består av 21 domar gällande umgänge med umgängesstöd från tingsrätten. Studien har utgångspunkt i socialkonstruktionismen och för att fördjupa analysen och för att bidra till diskussionen har inslag av barndomssociologiska perspektiv samt Roger Harts delaktighetsstege (1992) tillämpats. Laclau och Mouffe presenterar i sin diskursanalys flertalet centrala begrepp, men vi har fokuserat på begreppen diskurs, flytande signifikanter och subjektspositioner som är av störst relevans utifrån studiens syfte och frågeställningar. De diskurser om barnet som identifierats i materialet är; den familjeorienterade, skyddsorienterade och rättighetsorienterade diskursen. De flytande signifikanter som urskilts är; barnets bästa, umgängesstöd och barnets mognad. Till sist, de subjektspositioner vi ser att barnet placeras i är; rättighetsbäraren och skyddsobjektet. Studien visar på att det är långt ifrån självklart hur barnets bästa ska bedömas i tingsrättens domar samt att möjligheterna till delaktighet för barn är begränsade av olika faktorer så som påverkan av vuxna samt barnets mognad och ålder. Hur barnet framställs är inte heller givet då det är något som är beroende av barnets subjektsposition som i sin tur påverkas av vilken diskurs som råder. Studiens resultat lämnar oss undrande om insatsen ”umgänge med umgängesstöd” i själva verket beviljas för barnen, eller om den beviljas utifrån föräldrarnas bästa. / The following study is a qualitative document study whose purpose is to explore the way in which the child, its participation and its best interests are presented in the district court through a discourse analysis based on Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe's discourse theory (2001; 2008). The study has examined judgments from the district court regarding supervised visitation according to Chapter 6 §15c Children and Parents Code (FB) (SFS 1949:381). The legal framework regarding the child, presented in the Children and Parents Code and the Convention on the Rights of the Child (Law [SFS 2018:1197] on the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child), indicates that the child possesses a strong position in relation to adults, but research shows that children rarely get the opportunity to participate and rarely get their will heard. The study's empirical material consists of 21 judgments regarding supported visitation from the district court. These have been analyzed with the help of a discourse analysis to examine how the district court portrays the child, their participation, and the best interest of the child. The study is based on a social constructionist theory. To deepen the analysis the study has also used sociological perspectives on children and childhood and Roger Hart's ladder of participation (1992) to contribute to the discussion. Laclau and Mouffe present in their discourse analysis several central concepts, but the following study has used the concepts that are the most relevant based on the studies’ aim and research questions. The discourses about the child that have been identified in the material are the family-oriented, protection-oriented, and rights-oriented discourse. The floating signifiers determined are the best interests of the child, supported visitation and the child's maturity. And finally, the subject positions we see the child placed in are the rights-holder and the object of protection. The study shows that it is far from obvious how the best interests of the child should be assessed in the district court's judgments and that the opportunities for participation for children are limited by several different factors such as influence from adults and the children’s maturity and age. How the child is portrayed is also not given as it is something that is dependent on the child's subject position, which in turn is affected by the prevailing discourse. Based on the results of the study we ask ourselves if the intervention “supervised visitation” is granted for the children, or if it is granted based on the parents' rights and needs.