Varje dag gifts 33 000 barn bort globalt, sammanlagt beräknas 650 miljoner av världens kvinnor ha gifts bort innan de uppnått myndighetsålder. År 1981 undertecknade Sverige konventionen om avskaffandet av all slags diskriminering av kvinnor (CEDAW) och konventionen började gälla samma år. CEDAW fastställer rätten att själv få välja med vem man vill ingå äktenskap samt att parterna ska vara minst 18 år vid tiden för giftermålet. Den 1 januari år 2020 inkorporerades barnkonventionen i svensk lag som ett steg i att stärka barns rättigheter. Barnkonventionen fastslår att konventionsstaterna är skyldiga att avskaffa skadliga sedvänjor, dit barnäktenskap hör. Som ett steg i att utöka skyddet för barn som riskerar bli bortgifta i utlandet infördes den 1 juli år 2020 ett utreseförbud i 31 a-i §§ (1990:52) med särskilda bestämmelser om vård av unga (LVU). Uppsatsen utreder vilken skyddsnivå Sverige, utifrån sina människorättsliga åtaganden, ska ge barn som riskerar att bli bortgifta i utlandet samt hur skyddsmekanismerna är utformade. Vidare utreds processen för att tillämpa utreseförbudet och vilka utmaningar som följer. För att skapa förståelse för det eventuella förtryck ett barn kan uppleva i samband med tillämpningen av utreseförbudet tillämpas Iris Marion Youngs teori om förtryckets fem ansikten i analysen.  Sverige ska enligt barnkonventionen och CEDAW till sin yttersta förmåga skydda barn från skadliga sedvänjor såsom barnäktenskap. För att vidareutveckla skyddet har bland annat ett utreseförbud införts i LVU. Resultatet visar att Sverige förvisso arbetar aktivt för att minska antalet barnäktenskap men att undantag gjorts för vilka resor som omfattas av förbudet. Frivilliga utlandsresor, där båda parter är minderåriga, omfattas inte vilket riskerar reducera barnens rättsliga skydd. Analys av förvaltningsrättens domar i mål rörande utreseförbud påvisar att barn som riskerar bli bortgifta i utlandet kan uppleva flera olika typer av förtryck, både från sin hemmiljö och staten. När staten fattar beslut som inskränker ett barns fri- och rättigheter för att skydda denne från att utsättas för skadliga sedvänjor är det av vikt att utreda hur det påverkar barnet. / Every day, 33,000 children are married off globally. In addition, a total of 650 million of the world's women are estimated to have been married off before reaching the age of majority. In 1981, Sweden signed the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) and the convention came into force the same year. CEDAW establishes the right to choose with whom you want to marry and that the parties must be 18 years or older at the time of the marriage. In 2020, the Convention on the Rights of the Child was incorporated into Swedish law as a step in strengthening children's rights. It states that States Parties are obliged to abolish harmful practices to which child marriage belongs. As a step in increasing the protection for children who are at risk of being married off abroad, a travel ban was also introduced in 2020 in 31 a-i §§ The Care of Young Persons (Special Provisions) Act. According to the Convention on the Rights of the Child and CEDAW, Sweden must do its utmost to protect children from harmful practices such as child marriage. This thesis investigates what level of protection Sweden should provide children who are at risk of being married off abroad and how the protection mechanisms are designed. Furthermore, the process for applying the travel ban and the challenges that follow are investigated. To create an understanding of the possible oppression a child may experience in connection with the application of the travel ban, Iris Marion Young's theory of the five faces of oppression is applied in the thesis' analysis.  The results show that Sweden certainly works actively to reduce the number of child marriages, but that exceptions have been made for which trips are covered by the ban. Voluntary trips abroad, where both parties are minors, are not covered, which risks reducing the children's legal protection. Analysis of the Administrative Court's rulings in cases concerning travel bans shows that children who are at risk of being married off abroad can experience several different types of oppression, both from their home environment and the state. When the state makes decisions that restrict a child's freedoms and rights to protect him or her from being exposed to harmful practices, it's important to investigate how it affects the child.

The purpose of this thesis was to achieve a deeper knowledge of the dilemma whichcan arise during a social welfare workers judgement of a reunion according to whatis best for the child in relation to a child’s right to their biological parents. Thisbachelor thesis was based on three research questions: What influences a socialwelfare workers judgement of a reunion according to what is best for the child, aswell as children’s right to their biological parents? How does a social welfare workerperceive its leeway during a judgement concerning reunion family reunion? How doesa social welfare worker perceive their authority to interpret according to their leeway?A qualitative study has been used to gain a deeper knowledge according to a socialwelfare workers experience. A hermeneutic approach has been used to answer thepurpose of our bachelor thesis and has contributed to a wider perspective of our study.The focus was to understand the dilemma through evaluating and interpretation. Sixsocial welfare workers participated in the following vignette survey, which werecomplemented with semi-structured questions. The participants have answeredregarding their experience concerning their leeway and authority to interpret the lawaccording to what is best for the child and their entitlement to their biological parents.This bachelor thesis research results show that social welfare workers did possessleeway which implies empowerment to interpret legislation, concepts and varioussituations. This can be seen as a prerequisite for correct decisions to be made duringdaily work. Although, it can also act as a risk since clients may receive differentconclusions depending on the social welfare worker. Furthermore, a conclusion of thethesis is that different judgements are made, even though the contributed informationwas identical. The explanation to these different assessments may relate to the socialwelfare workers leeway and authority to interpret the law, which makes investigatingchildren’s right to their parents and what is best for them even more complex.