Case constitutional decision-making by the example of child at risk assessments. Negotiations between social work and the courts.

在该项目之前，拟议的研究项目，一个快速和节俭的启发式已经重建的基础上民族志观察。启发式显示了儿童保护专业人员是如何参与意义的决策，以决定是否关闭一个案件或提供社会工作服务。与此同时，启发式证明了法院在审判实践中的中心地位--甚至在社会工作者的预期之内。社会工作者和法官形成了一个“判断网络”。在申请的研究项目中，将更精确地调查判断网络中的这种意义形成，特别强调青年福利办公室和家庭法院之间的谈判。因此，前一个项目的理论抽样一直在继续。该研究项目的目的是：（1）在法庭上进行谈判和讨论之前，检查专业人员的意义。最重要的是，团队会议、合议协商、日常讨论等，在开庭之前，为了调查对开庭的预期所产生的影响，将从人种学的角度对这些案件进行审查。(2)详细的民族志调查、社会工作、家事法庭审判和谈判。法庭上的讨论和协商是跨学科协商具体“风险”或“危害”的中心场所，因此可以分析社会工作者在多大程度上积极使用判断推理，将其主题化或将其结果转化为“司法推理”。主要目标是重建的翻译过程中的社会工作者，通过研究他们如何将建设的“明显的伤害”，这是从根本上不稳定的，到强大的“证据”，以及他们如何保持断言的“儿童处于危险之中”，通过借鉴建设的父母合作建立的启发式。

In the project preceding the proposed research project, a fast and frugal heuristic has been reconstructed based on ethnographic observations. The heuristic shows how child protection professionals are engaged in sense-making in order to decide whether to close a case or to provide social work services. At the same time, the heuristic demonstrates the central position of the courts in the practice of judgment – even within the anticipations of the social workers. Social workers and judges form a "network of judgments". This sense-making in judgment networks is to be investigated more precisely in the research project to be applied for, with a special emphasis on the negotiations between youth welfare offices and family courts. Thus, the theoretical sampling of the predecessor project is consistently continued. The aim of the research project is to: (1) Examine the sense-making of professionals in advance of negotiations and discussions in court. Above all, team meetings, collegial consultations, day-to-day discussions, etc., are to be ethnographically examined, which take place before the court is called in order to investigate the effects that the anticipation of the court has in advance. (2) Detailed ethnographic investigation social work judgement and negotiations in family court procedings. Discussions and negotiations in court are a central place where concrete "risks" or "harms" are negotiated interdisciplinary, so that it can be analyzed to what extent the social workers actively use the judgment heuristics, thematize it in court or translate their results into "judicial reasoning". The main objective is the reconstruction of the translation process of the social workers, by studying how they transform the construction of "obvious harm", which is fundamentally precarious, into robust "evidence" and how they maintain assertions of the "child at risk" by drawing on constructions of parental co-operation established with the heuristic.