1. The University of Stavanger
FACULTY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES
Home exam - Autumn 2015
Course code MEN270
Course title Nordicmodelsforgenderequalityandwelfare
Candidate’snumber 2325
Whichoption of
exercise have you
chosen?(1 or 2)
Option2
Title of your
assignment
“Social changesto the familyinstitutional model”
Numberof words 5008
We remindyouof the rulesagainstplagiarismandcheating,please remember:
1. That the textin yourassignment/paperhas notbeenusedinotherwrittentexts submittedtothe
Universityof Stavangerorothereducational institutionsbefore.
2. That you donot quote otherpeople’sworkwithoutaddressingthisthroughreferencing.
3. That you do not quote yourownpreviousworkwithoutaddressingthisthroughreferencing.
4. That you include all referencesandsourcesthatyoubase your textuponinthe bibliographyatthe
endof yourtext.
5. That you cite correctlyandshowwhere the citationstartsand endsbyquotationmarks,and that
youreferto the source and page numberof yourcitation.
If these rulesare not compliedtowe will consideritascheating.Cheator the attemptof cheat will be
treatedas describedin the Actrelatingtouniversitiesanduniversitycolleges §54, 1 b and § 42, 3.
http://www.regjeringen.no/en/doc/laws/acts/act-relating-to-universities-and-univers.html?id=213307
You will alsofindmore informationinthe Universityof Stavangerguidelinesonthe studentpages.
http://student.uis.no/english/examination/academic_misconduct_during_examination/assessment/
I accept that the Universityof Stavangercan use this assignmentinconnectiontoresearchand
education:
Crossof for yesor no. Yes:X No:….

2. 1
HOME EXAM
in Nordic Models of Equality and Welfare
Time period
22.02.16 – 01.03.16
Title:
“Social changes to the family institutional model”
Candidate number: 2325
Option 2.

3. 2
Index
Abstract................................................................................................................................................ 3
Option 2................................................................................................................................................ 4
Social changes to the family institutional model................................................................................ 4
The social changes – what is defined as different?............................................................................10
The family institution model – how to accept changes......................................................................12
Another aspect on equal rights for the parents.................................................................................13
Reference list....................................................................................................................................17

4. 3
Abstract
Social changes are a paradox that occurs in a daily basis where people seeks love and partners to
marry for their lifetime.
In Nordic countries there are more divorced couples than in Southern Europe. People find new life-
time partners and they want the love to last. This affects the family institution model in a way where
families get interconnected with other families. In this way it’s possible to see it as a bigger family
model then before.
The welfare model suits the Nordic family policies mostly in the traditional way, and the equality
policies are getting good. Has it gone so far into a new social change that the Nordic family
institution model need some changes? Does the welfare and equality model support all kinds of
families?

5. 4
Option 2
Social changes to the family institutional model
There are many types of families in our early century 2016. Divorced families re-marries with other
partners and therefore makes the family bigger with agreements of custody rights for their children.
It is not so long ago that the Equality Commission in Norway decided that there were a lot of work
to do to deliver better equality to the market and family unions. “In 2011, the government-appointed
Equality Commission, consisting of 12 of the leading gender researchers in Norway, concluded that
Norwegian gender equality policy was unsuccessful (NOU 2011: 18)”.
(http://www.geq.socjologia.uj.edu.pl/documents/32447484/80907944/GEQ_Working_Paper_GE_P
olicy_Norway_TKorsvik.pdf ) 29.02.16. One year later there was an exciting report on the 10. April
2012, The UN – High Commissioner for Human Rights states that;
“One overriding goal of Norwegian policy has been to make the balance between family life and working life
possible.This has strengthened women in the labour market enabling them to income and economic
independence. Shared parenthood and shared family responsibilities are main factors of this process of change.
Individual rights, individual protection and universal arrangements have strengthened the individual, women
and men. Legislation and individual rights have made Norway into one of the least family-dependent and most
individual societies. For instance individual taxation of spouses,individual rights in the social insurance
scheme, genderequal marriage legislation and children rights law. The family still remains as a central social
institution, but also infused with a moral of logic of autonomy and equality.”
(http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/Women/WG/PublicPoliticalLife/Norway.pdf ) 29.02.16.
Some couples in our country are divorcing because of their sexual orientation has turned into
homosexuality, or it might be another reason they leave their partners. There are parents with
psychiatric diagnosis that after treatment can function well, more alike the rest of the society. Can it
be interpreted as that different classes, ethnicity and decreased function is also included in the new
agreement of 2014?
Social equality about having children and getting a job should be more a human right for everyone.
The reason children need to get a good knowledge about their parent is for biological reasons. Even
though this is not always the practical traditional model. Children’s rights are also an important law

6. 5
we must consider to fit in the equality system. Can previous parents that has gotten sick, get their
second chances after treatment? Some cases might be hard to solve, but if they meet a new partner
and their life has changed to the better – what would be the right thing to do for these people?
Is it unequal to say they cannot have children? This is one of the social challenges the Nordic
countries is heading through. But big families either split, or they can help each other. This makes
changes in the social structure of the family bigger, and every child deserves a good childhood and
a family that loves them no matter what. The Health § 10a says that;
“Health professionals should help to safeguard the need for information and necessary follow-up that minor
children of patients with mental illness, drug addiction or serious physical illness or injury can have as a result
of the parent's condition. (..) Healthcare professionals providing health care to the patient mentioned in the first
paragraph shall apply to determine whether the patient has minor children. (..) When it is necessary to
safeguard the child's needs, the health personnelincluding
a) conversation with the patient about the child's information or monitoring needs and provide information and
guidance on appropriate measures. Within the framework of confidentiality the health personnelalso offer
child and others who care for the child, to take part in such a conversation
b) obtain consent to conduct follow-up which health personneldeems appropriate
c) help the child and the people who care for the child, in accordance with rules on confidentiality, given
information about the patient's disease state,treatment and opportunity for companionship. The information
shall be in a form that is tailored to the patient's individual circumstances .”
(Alnes, 2009, http://tidsskriftet.no/article/2125166/ ) 02.03.2016.
This can be interpreted in different ways, but it seems like it’s the family around or people that
cares for the child the mostly that are obligated to take care for the children while the parent(s) are
sick. They should as often as possible and if it’s not a threat to the child, keep the love between the
parents and their children awake. This is because if when the parents get well, they can be
transferred back to their homes or at least have a good relationship to them.
A few single mothers are young when they become a parent, and this might give them more
difficulties after they lose their three-year long cash-transfer support. “The Ministry may issue
regulations detailing the contents of the health care professionals' obligations under this provision”.

7. 6
(Alnes, 2009, http://tidsskriftet.no/article/2125166/ ) 02.03.2016. Sometimes they don’t make it so
far, and they have to give their kids into foster-care.
This is often elder families with mostly the traditional kind of family model. The kids get a lot of
welfare, cash-transfers through the new system they get, and it often gets very unequal at the bottom
for the young mothers. What can be supported to prevent these types of situations. This is not
human equality and welfare at the best. They might have experienced some trouble getting the job
they needed. Huffington Post has this argument to come with;
“Despite the fight for equal opportunity,women are still earning less than men do, working part-time more
than men do, have fewer power positions,are under-represented in municipal politics, and are choosing to stay
at home longer which in its turn affects professionalcareers. Ethnic Norwegian men dominate in positions of
power in most sectors ofNorwegian society. (…) Formal equality is about equal opportunities to participate,
and to make the choices that affect yourlife. Real equality is about equal distribution of participation,
resources,power and responsibilities.” (Brother, 2015, http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/mona-elisabeth-
brother/gender-equality-norway_b_6809300.html ) 24.02.16.
There is now an analysis of gender policy regimes taken by Sanisbury that divides into four
dimensions which is “Whether the rights are individualized or familialized, Degree to which
gendered differentiation in entitlements is based on the traditional division of labour between
women and men. Scope of state responsibility for caring tasks. Women’s and men’s equal access to
paid work” (Sainsbury 1999:79, SÜMER, 2009:26). This social science was written in 2009.
The familialistic model describes a typical Southern European family type of living where they care
for each other within the family. Can this be a more equal model for the young single mothers? A
Norwegian statement from the government in 2006 is that “An “extended” family can provide good
support and assistance and bring joy to both children and adults in a hectic everyday life when both
parents are working outside the home.” (Øye, 2006, https://www.regjeringen.no/no/aktuelt/the-
greatest-of-all-is-love-on-norwegian/id437476/ ) 29.02.16.
When you compare welfare regimes and the family policies you have to look upon how people live
to survive and the targeting birth-rate. Esping-Andersen (1990, 1992, SÜMER, 2009:20) has the

8. 7
model that there are “three regimes” that is being based on an analysis on T. H. Marshall’s
proposition. This is a social citizenship with ideas of welfare and variations:
“He underlines that in comparing welfare states,we have to think in terms of social relations since power,
democracy and welfare are all relational and structured phenomena. The nature of class mobilization, class
coalition structures and historical legacy of the institutionalization of political behaviour are important factors
in understanding welfare state variations.” (SÜMER, 2009:20)
These three regimes are decommodification, Social stratification and State, market (and family)
relations. The Scandinavian countries has also key characteristics of their welfare model which is:
“Comprehensiveness, Level of institutionalism and Universalism.” (SÜMER, 2009:41) The last
characteristic is about uniting the population in a more comprehensive sort of way.
In the historical view of Norway, Gro Harlem Brundtland, our former prime minister was a key to
open up a more “…“woman-friendly” welfare state. This notion was coined by political scientist
Helga Maria Hernes, herself a member of the Labour Party, in her 1987 book Welfare State and
Woman Power: Essays in State Feminism: 13.” (Korsvik, 2014:22,23) The notion stated of Helga
Maria Hernes was revolutionary and is quoted as following;
“A woman-friendly state would enable women to have a natural relationship to their children, their work and
public life […]. A woman-friendly state would not force harder choices on women than on men, or permit
unjust treatment on the basis of sex. In a woman-friendly state women will continue to have children, yet there
will also be other roads to self-realization open to them. In such a state women will not have to choose futures
that demand greater sacrifices from them than are expected of men (Hernes 1987, p. 15), (13 For an analysis of
the analytical potential and normative value of Helga M. Hernes’ concept about woman-friendly welfare states
in a Scandinavian perspective, see Borchorst & Siim 2008. 23).”
(http://www.geq.socjologia.uj.edu.pl/documents/32447484/80907944/GEQ_Working_Paper_GE_Policy_Nor
way_TKorsvik.pdf) 29.02.16
Well, we are now in 2016 and the newest report is from last year 17.02.2015 where there is another
agreement that is called “Women, Peace and Security”. This plan was published in the Norwegian
Governments home page as follows; “Prime Minister Erna Solberg presented the action plan in
Oslo on 16 February 2015, together with Minister of Foreign Affairs Børge Brende, Minister of

9. 8
Defence Ine Eriksen Søreide, Minister of Justice and Public Security Anders Anundsen, and
Minister of Children, Equality and Social Inclusion Solveig Horne.”
(https://www.regjeringen.no/globalassets/departementene/ud/vedlegg/fn/ud_handlingsplan_kfs_eng
_nett.pdf )29.02.16. There has been changes in how we represent equality matters and goals. But
what are these changes and do they highlight our type of thinking when it comes to equality and the
welfare state?
The content of this agreement is goals that needs to be fulfilled and resolutions that includes men in
participating “in to play a more active part in ensuring that both women and men can enjoy the
benefits of peace, security and equal rights.” (Norwegian Government, “Women, Peace and
Security, 2015 – 18”:5) 29.02.16. This is further a strongly a matter of establishing and evolve the
way of living together in peace and harmony until the women will get the life they are needed. This
is further explained in this report like;
“…norms and make recommendations on how to integrate a gender perspective into peace and security efforts.
The starting point is that ensuring women’s participation and taking the experience of women into account are
of crucial importance in preventing and dealing with conflict, in providing effective protection for women, and
for establishing peace processes that result in sustainable peace. The resolutions point to the need to
incorporate a gender perspective into international operations,so that the security needs of both men and
women are taken into account.” (Norwegian Government, “Women, Peace and Security”, 2015 – 18”:9)
29.02.16
It is also stated that women “must be able to take part in the peace processes” (Norwegian
Government, “Women, Peace and Security:11) that they enter through life. This could be stated
from this report as sexual violence or a humanitarian crisis. This is also an equal right for settling
down their family life in Norway. UIO has stated that; “Gender equality policies in Norway:
“Everybody’s job, nobody’s responsibility”?” (Korsvik, 2014, lest 29.02.16). This is more about
equality rights and history around it. Why everyone takes responsibility on their job, but are also
living their family life. The standard goes so far out in the world that we have the Norwegian Model
to go after;
As Danielsen & Larsen put it: The field of family and gender equality was made into policy of inclusion and
integration. The aim of the public policies was to integrate “the others”,the new Norwegians, into the

10. 9
Norwegian Model. In this way they were channelled into the pattern of the genderequal, double working
couple, the ideal of the good life (Danielsen et al. 2013, p. 351). (Korsvik, 2014:30
http://www.geq.socjologia.uj.edu.pl/documents/32447484/80907944/GEQ_Working_Paper_GE_Policy_Norw
ay_TKorsvik.pdf ) 29.02.16.
This model is close to the Nordic institutional model of equality and welfare. That is because we
have institutions like kindergarten, school-system and “SFO” that take care of the children while the
parents work. Here in the agreement, the daddy’s get “daddy’s quota”. That means more space to
stay home with the kids at an early stage, so the mother can go to work after her own quota. This is
to make it easier for the couple in their parenthood and for cooperate among their kids.
This might be to prevent divorce, as it is more common in Nordic countries where women have
more free will, and are not that much economic dependent on their husband. But, then again, if they
are in a healthy relationship it is not likely they will divorce. Divorces and broken cohabitations are
family trends that makes a lot of single parenthood in the Nordic countries. Heikkila, M., Hvinden,
B., Kautto, M., Marklund, S., Ploug, N. (2002:74) has found out in their research that;
“…the economic level of single parents in Sweden was good in the sense there were remarkably few below the
poverty level. This is the success side ofthe Nordic income transfer policies. While investigating possible
long-term consequences they found that women and men who had grown up in single-parent families, although
not earning less then those growing up with both biological parents,were over-represented among recipients of
social assistance (Gustafson et al. 1997)…”
This is why it might not be so good to divorce or move in a single-parenthood, but take a great
consideration before this happens. Some separated parents meet new life-partners as well. This is an
about 10-20-year old trend we now may see the consequences of. These kids might learn how
important it is to stay in a healthy relationship in a while before having kids? And what will happen
with the kids living in foster-cares. Will they become strong parents? As the Government in
Norway states:
“Society should support good,lasting partnerships because they have a fundamental impact on the conditions
in which children grow up. Certain measures have been implemented over a number of years aimed at
preventing the break-up of marriages and partnerships”. (Regjeringen, 2006,
https://www.regjeringen.no/no/aktuelt/the-greatest-of-all-is-love-on-norwegian/id437476/) lest 29.02.16.

11. 10
The Scandinavian welfare are mostly supporting the family institutional model as a “dual-earner
family model” and it’s still working quite well. In a welfare model there are also “a traditional male
breadwinner family” and “states leaving it to individuals to find private or market-based solutions
(Korpi, 2000)” (Ellingsæther, 2006:121). In Norway there are all accurate, but the “hybrid” family
model, is most common. This model is combining a “double-track” with the “dual-earner support”
(Ellingsæther, 2006:121). It’s because there are mostly two types of families, but there are also
single parents now in 2016 that have been single-mothers with cash transfers that has ended up in
new relationships and new kids. What kind of family model does these fit in?
The social changes – what is defined as different?
With the social changes as an interconnected family sphere, where you have more than one family
to keep up with. Is it the liberty that makes us so changeable? Ruth Lister has her statement in “A
Nordic Nirvana? Gender, Citizenship, and Social Justice in the Nordic Welfare States*” about
Sweden and the Nordic. There has been changes since 2009, but yet again it seems like the people
are turning back to the “liberal-left again”;
“One reason why Sweden and the otherNordic countries hold this place in the “liberal-left imagination” is
because politics and policy are, more than elsewhere in Europe, framed by values that the liberal-left holds
dear. Ed Miliband, an influential British Cabinet minister, has held up Scandinavian social democracy as a
model because of its tradition of: “sustained incremental change which knits progressive values deep into the
fabric of the country” (2007, 111). More than any otherwelfare state model, the Nordic or social democratic
model is not just a label applied by welfare regime analysts but is worn with pride by Scandinavian
governments and citizens.” (Lister, 2009:245-246, http://www.vasa.abo.fi/users/minygard/Undervisning-
filer/Lister%202009.pdf ) 29.02.16.
Now, in 2016 the Norwegians have the right party, as we wanted Erna Solberg as our prime
minister. But it might change, as it seems to go from right to more left again as earlier described.
This is because of the smaller communes that voted in 2015 wants more of the Labour party to
decide over our way in the politics. Of 19 counties there are 17 that have become a Labour party
area. (Torseth, Valvik, 2015, http://www.aftenposten.no/nyheter/iriks/politikk/Slik-stemte-Norge-

12. 11
8165228.html ) 29.02.16. This is why politics is so important when it comes to equality and welfare
models. Weedon (1987:1) has a huge matter of comment in the article “Different Perspectives on
Gender” which is;
“…`Feminism is politics`, and should be seen as synonymous with critique and change. Feminist theorizing is
directed at the creation of knowledge not only to study the world but how to change it (Stanley, 1990)”
(Alvesson,Mats and Billing, 2009:21).
It is therefore important to believe that a more equal politics, will result in more equal justice in
taking care of the children in the different typologies of families. And what will be the
consequences for the kids growing up in the biggest families? As long as there is a lot of love and
good cooperation among the people involved, there will be good preconditions for these children.
This is something that needs to be investigated further, but equal rights and good treatment for the
parents are very important in the processes.
The different types of family models started to evolve more and more the past years, and is this the
new paradox? It might have a linkage to equality, feminism and the newer regimes. Types of
welfare is also a factor. To find out if this is something to investigate, we need more science.
“National case studies are particular valuable, as they attend to complexity, context and chronology
within the national setting (Daly and Lewis 1998).” (Ellingsæther, 2006:123).
This is because of the economic situation, some people can choose to live alone to get the money
transfers, instead of being a house wife. This might be rarely, but is it true? The chronological
setting is therefore important to take in consideration. “High-quality and affordable childcare
services are one of the most important components in supporting parents’/mothers’ right to work”
(Ellingsæther, 2006:123). The “service regime” therefore has also a lot to say in how good the
parent will do as a family model. If this doesn’t work properly, the parents might get sick.
So the childcare has a lot to say in helping parents getting on in their careers so they do not get in
financial trouble and hit the wall. This is very helpful in the Nordic system, and there are a lot that
can prevent parents for getting too sick to take care of their children. To get equal rights between
human beings in Norway, we must consider the children’s needs and happiness as well.

13. 12
The family institution model – how to accept changes
The Equal opportunities for the families in the Scandinavian welfare model is also included in the
EUs documents. The 3rd Action Programme for Equal Opportunities (1991-1995) is in the EU
documents this is defined as follows:
“Gender mainstreaming is the integration ofthe gender perspective into every stage of policy processes –
design,implementation,monitoring and evaluation – with a view to promoting equality between women and
men. It means assessing how policiesimpact on the life and position of both women and men – and taking
responsibility to re-address them if necessary. This is the way to make gender equality a concrete reality in the
lives of women and men creating space for everyone within the organisations as well in communities – to
contribute to the process of articulating a shared vision of sustainable human development and translating it
into reality (EC nd)”. (SÜMER, 2009:80)
“Gender mainstreaming” can have an effect on how people live their lives today, where the
Government can adjust their policies so it fits better into the society we live in. Better equality will
also achieve the welfare of living in different types of families. As Strategaki 2005, Lombardo and
Meier 2006 mentions that this concept is misunderstood and at times misused. Therefore, there is a
need for academic involvement in the discussions. It is also about witch context you’re in and how
deep the insight will be in working on mainstreaming. (SÜMER, 2009:80)
This work may need a psychological hypothesis and testing to find new policies that will give new
well function policies in this society. Social changes can affect the policies in equality and welfare,
and therefore is the strategy in mainstreaming an analyse tool which can be used to affect new
policies.
“The use of gendermainstreaming as a strategy implies analysing issues from a genderperspective and aiming
at more equal solutions.The authorities should at least analyse their field of responsibility to identify possible
gender perspectives.If a new policy or a change in a policy implicates genderinequalities, the policy needs to
be reformulated.”
(Gender in Norway, 2006, http://www.gender.no/Policies_tools/1090 ) 29.02.16.
This is when we can think of all the inequalities that come up on our daily basis. What is not good
enough, what must we as women accept, and what can be changed? Can there be more appropriate

14. 13
treatment for the ill parents that love their kids? Are they allowed to get a second chance later in
their lives? Some of them are war victims coming to Norway and need some assistance. Do they
feel the equality that the Nordic countries are so famous about? Per Arne Sandvold states that:
"It is time to realize some realities. Norway does not have a uniform culture anymore, we are multicultural.
Norway is not only ethnic Norwegian anymore, we have multi-ethnic background.Norway has not only a
dominant religion anymore but is a diverse religious landscape with several religions. Norway has not only one
living longer but many. This is a challenge but also offers opportunities.(...) It is easy to be blinded by
different. What we have in common is that we are human beings.We are people with dreams of a good life.
What we have in common is the same country; this is where we will stay together." (Sandvold, 2016,
http://www.aftenbladet.no/meninger/debatt/Hva-er-norsk-3878662.html ) 26.02.16.
So, the newest debate goes on our ethnicity and how we all are “people with dreams of a good life”
(Sandvold, 2016). If women want to be a good single parent, why should they not? On the other
side, if people in treatment want to be parents when its settling down around them why can’t they?
Is it unequal to say that some people does not deserve a second chance? These are changeable
sociologic factors that floats in our system. If there are changes, why can’t people just accept them?
Another aspect on equal rights for the parents
Another way of thinking of unequal rights are for the gay parents that wishes a good life with
children. They have fought for a long time and now they have the opportunity to raise their kids.
Victory for these people in equal rights have come to stay:
“In Norway, a gender-neutral Marriage Law that secured equal marriage and parenting rights for lesbian, gay
and heterosexual couples took effect in January 2009. The aim of the current study was to explore Norwegian
beliefs about equal marriage and parenting rights for lesbian, gay and heterosexual couples and the welfare of
children with lesbian and gay parents.” (Hollekim, Slaatten og Anderssen,2011,
https://bora.uib.no/bitstream/handle/1956/5600/A%20Nationwide%20Study%20of%20Norwegian%20Beliefs
%20About%20Same-sex.pdf?sequence=1) 02.03.2016.

15. 14
This happened 7 years ago, but it is not that long time. But think of the bright side, this is an
important equal right for the parents wishing kids. It is also possible to place it into a Nordic
familialistic institutional model. We have to follow up the weak people to prevent unequal rights in
our society. More research should lead to more positive outcomes for these people suffering from
the negativity and unequal treatment. If this is not politically correct, it does not mean it’s wrong:
“Knowledge then easily becomes constructed in ways to benefit the cause.Key virtues such as honesty,
curiosity, carefulness and caution may suffer. In addition, there is the problem of who is to determine how the
social world should be changed and which part of status quo disadvantages ordevalues women. Researchers
should carefully reflect upon this, be aware of arrogance and elitism and show considerable openness about
whether their views are `correct ones`and not only the political correct ones.” (Alvesson & Billing, 2009:21)
There are also “three major points” in gender studies we have to take a notice of. The first one is
“the notion of gender is central and relevant to understanding all social relations, institutions and
processes” (Alvesson & Billing, 2009:21), which may be brought in to consideration when we work
along the different family models. Second, “gender relations constitute a problem as they are
characterized by patterns of domination/subordination, inequalities, oppression and oppositions”
(Alvesson & Billing, 2009:21) and this is an important view of the weaker people in our society.
These points can be highlighted in science when we consider the Nordic family model and the
changes we are going through. At last we must look upon the gender and the inequality with much
care. If we want a change, then talk about it. Get it to the politics and we might get a different angle
after a little while. Cooperation with the system is the best thing to do, for a change in the future:
“gender relations are seen as social constructions.They are not naturally given – an offspring of biology and
impossible to change – but an outcome of socio-cultural and historical conditions,i.e. of processes in which
people interpret and (re)create the social world.” (Alvesson & Billing, 2009:21)
And as the Government in Norway states in 2015, we might see some changes on when it comes to
the people with disabilities. They are “Persons with disabilities are to have the same living
conditions and quality of life as the rest of the population” and this was a very important brake
through. “The Ministry of Children, Equality and Social Inclusion coordinates policy, The Ministry

16. 15
of Children, Equality and Social Inclusion (the Ministry) is responsible for the national anti-
discrimination legislation which, among other things, prohibits discrimination on the basis of
disability. In addition, the Ministry coordinates the government's policy regarding persons with
disabilities” (Espinoza, 2015, https://www.regjeringen.no/en/topics/equality-and-social-
inclusion/likestilling-og-inkludering/funksjonsnedsetjingar/id2005941/ ) 02.03.2016.
This mean that people suffering from injury, should have the same rights as other people in
Norway. When it comes to parenthood, there can be adjustments in their home that can make them
a good parent with help from their bigger family. They should not lose their kids right away. This
may remind us about the Southern-European family model, but we have institutions that can also
provide a good situation for their kids. Love is great, and biology is also very important.
“The biological principle is based on the fundamental belief that children primarily intended to grow up with
their biological parents and that it is important to know their biological parents.Child Welfare Act states,
however, state that child must be decisive. This means that the child's basic needs for protection and care must
be emphasized over parental rights and upbringing in biological family.” (Regjeringen, barnevern, 2011,
https://www.regjeringen.no/no/aktuelt/utvalg-som-skal-vurdere-biologisk-prinsi/id633852/ ) 02.03.2016.
The rules about the children’s safety are quite clear. They should not experience any harm and this
is more important than biology. This is very acceptable as we don’t want anything bad happen to
our kids. Equal rights are important, but sometimes the human rights can crash where the children
are more important than the “grown-ups”. But are the measures too small for helping the parents at
an early stage. And what if it has gone 10 years since the parent lost his/her kids. Can they become
great parents later on? People do mature and the society changes through time. This must be to
break or make a new paradigm which is not so very easy to do.
“Paradigm, one problem being accepted as exemplary for solutions of similar problems within the same
science, and thereby creates a scientific tradition. The term was introduced in the philosophy of science and
history of science Thomas S. Kuhn in The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1962)” (Tønnesen,2015,
https://snl.no/paradigme)02.03.2016.

17. 16
A paradigm is therefore something we all believe in is true, but sometimes may change over newer
science. So, if we want more change we may have to find more science in helping parents that are
sick, and not tolerate that they are sick forever. Helping each other to prevent that children lose their
parents might be a suggestion and bring this on the table. This can cause the Nordic family model
some safety. Everyone has their dreams we all want to fulfil. This might be a solution in the future,
but the children’s safety is always important.

18. 17
Reference list
- Alnes N. H., «Barn har ikkje tid til å vente» 2009, Tidsskrift for Den Norske Legeforening
http://tidsskriftet.no/article/2125166/ 02.03.2016.
- Alvesson, Mats and Yvonne Due Billing (2009) “Different Perspectives on Gender.” In
Understanding Gender and Organizations, Sage, Los Angeles/London/New
Dehli/Singapore/Washington DC (39 pages)
- Brende B., Søreide I. E., Anundsen A., Horne S., «Women, Peace and Security 2015-2018»
Regjeringen 2015,
https://www.regjeringen.no/globalassets/departementene/ud/vedlegg/fn/ud_handlingsplan_k
fs_eng_nett.pdf 29.03.16
- Brother M. E., “Gender Equality In Norway: Progressive Policies And Major Challenges”
2015, http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/mona-elisabeth-brother/gender-equality-
norway_b_6809300.html 24.03.16.
- Ellingsæther, A. L. 2006, “The Norwegian childcare regime and it’s paradoxes” A. L. and
A. Leira (eds) Politicising parenthood in Scandinavia. Gender relations in welfare states.
Bristol: Policy Press. Page 121-144. (24 pages)
- Espinoza M. B., “Disabilities” 2015, https://www.regjeringen.no/en/topics/equality-and-
social-inclusion/likestilling-og-inkludering/funksjonsnedsetjingar/id2005941/ 02.03.2016.
- Gender in Norway, 2006, http://www.gender.no/Policies_tools/1090 29.02.16.
- Heikkila, M., Hvinden, B., Kautto, M., Marklund, S., Ploug, N., «Nordic Social Policy:
Changing the welfare states» (22. januar, 2002) 312 pages, Routledge.
https://books.google.no/books?id=SFeGAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA74&lpg=PA74&dq=broken+c
.ohabitations+nordic&source=bl&ots=KtTpqInWMc&sig=NSm2-
oqaoQhPzKjNVy3b68IFMl8&hl=no&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjegbm38J3LAhVqDZoKHQd
wAScQ6AEILDAC#v=onepage&q=broken%20cohabitations%20nordic&f=false 29.02.16
- Hollekim, R., Slaatten, H. og Anderssen, N., «A Nationwide Study of Norwegian Beliefs
About Same-sex Marriage and Lesbian and Gay Parenthood» 2011,
https://bora.uib.no/bitstream/handle/1956/5600/A%20Nationwide%20Study%20of%20Nor
wegian%20Beliefs%20About%20Same-sex.pdf?sequence=1 02.03.2016
- Korsvik, T. R. «Gender equality policies in Norway: “Everybody’s job, nobody’s
responsibility”? Centre for Gender Research, University of Oslo Jagiellonian University of
Krakow 2009-2014,
http://www.geq.socjologia.uj.edu.pl/documents/32447484/80907944/GEQ_Working_Paper
_GE_Policy_Norway_TKorsvik.pdf

19. 18
- Lister, R. 2009 p. 242-278 «A Nordic Nirvana? Gender, Citizenship, and Social Justice in
the Nordic Welfare States» http://www.vasa.abo.fi/users/minygard/Undervisning-
filer/Lister%202009.pdf 29.02.16.
- Regjeringen, Barnevern, 2011, https://www.regjeringen.no/no/aktuelt/utvalg-som-skal-
vurdere-biologisk-prinsi/id633852/ 02.03.2016
- Regjeringen, Stoltenberg II, «The Greatest of all is love – on Norwegian family an equality
policy» 2006, https://www.regjeringen.no/no/aktuelt/the-greatest-of-all-is-love-on-
norwegian/id437476/ 02.03.16.
- Sandvold, P. A. «Hva er norsk», 2016, http://www.aftenbladet.no/meninger/debatt/Hva-er-
norsk-3878662.html 26.02.16.
- SÜMER, S., “EUROPEAN GENDER REGIMES AND POLICIES Comparative
Perspectives”, University of Bergen, Norway, 2009, ASHGATE.
- The UN, «Report from Norway» 2012,
http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/Women/WG/PublicPoliticalLife/Norway.pdf
29.02.16.
- Torseth N. S., Valvik M. E, «Slik stemte Norge» 2015,
http://www.aftenposten.no/nyheter/iriks/politikk/Slik-stemte-Norge-8165228.html 29.02.16.
- Tønnesen S, «Paradigme» 2015, Store Norske Leksikon, https://snl.no/paradigme 02.03.16