Search results

This article analyzes the challenges Finnish single mothers experienced in their everyday lives during the COVID-19 pandemic. In studies on challenges to family life during COVID-19 lockdowns, single-parent families remain a largely understudied group.

The authors apply triple bind theory and ask how did Finnish single mothers manage the interplay between inadequate resources, inadequate employment, and inadequate policies during lockdown in spring 2020? These data come from an online survey including both qualitative and quantitative questions which was conducted between April and May 2020 to gather Finnish families' experiences during lockdown. This analysis is based on the qualitative part of the survey.

This study's results show that lockdown created new inadequacies while also enhancing some old inadequacies in the lives of Finnish single mothers. During lockdown, single mothers faced policy- and resource-disappearances; accordingly, they lost their ability to do paid work normally. Furthermore, these disappearances endangered the well-being of some single mothers and their families.

This article contributes to the wider understanding of everyday lives of single mothers and the challenges COVID-19 pandemic created. Moreover, this study provides knowledge on the applicability of the triple bind theory when studying the everyday lives of single mothers.

While studies on service users’ participation and their perceptions on the quality of services exist, agreement between family members’ and practitioners’ assessments of the family’s situation has received less interest. The purpose of this paper is to investigate agreement and its effect on outcomes by comparing the viewpoints of three groups of informants (children, mothers and practitioners) in the context of statutory child protection in two study groups – one applying a systemic approach (SPM) and a service-as-usual control group (SAU).

A quasi-experimental repeated-measures study design was applied. Outcome data comprised 112 cases (SPM cases n = 56 and SAU cases n = 56) at three sites. Data was collected from all participants at baseline and six months later.

First, practitioners’ analyses of a child’s need for protection did not meet family members’ expressed need for help. Second, child–mother agreement on the need for service intervention at T1 predicted a decrease in practitioner-assessed abuse or neglect from T1 to T2. In this sample, no differences were found between the two groups.

This study highlights the importance of making explicit the viewpoints of children, parents and practitioners in casework and research to improve understanding of how their perspectives differ over the course of the process and how possible initial disagreements affect outcomes.