Nottinghamshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust, Nottingham, UK.
School of Biomedical Sciences, University of West London, London, UK.
J Eval Clin Pract. 2022 Oct;28(5):867-874. doi: 10.1111/jep.13700. Epub 2022 May 22.
This article examines the processes that contribute to the stigmatization of a group of people typically identified as "children in care" or "looked after children." In particular, we will look at the ways that we (adults, professionals, and carers) interact with these children, based on their status as both children and members of a socially marginalized and disadvantaged group, and how these modes of interaction can inhibit dialogue-a dialogue that is needed if we are to base our conceptions regarding the needs of these children on a more accurate understanding of their experiences and perspective. The problem is particularly challenging because the very terminology we use in the care community to identify this group is a product of the damaging preconceptions that have affected our interactions with its members and, we argue, it serves to reinforce those preconceptions. Using Fricker's work on epistemic injustice, in conjunction with evidence regarding how accusations of abuse and neglect of these children have been addressed in numerous cases, we illustrate the problems we have in hearing the voices of members of this group and the harmful effects this has on their own ability to understand and articulate their experiences. These problems represent "barriers to disclosure" that need to be surmounted if we are to establish a more inclusive dialogue. Currently, dialogue between these children and those of us charged to "look after" them is too often characterized by a lack of trust: not only in terms of the children feeling that their word is not taken seriously, that their claims are not likely to be believed, but also in their feeling that they cannot trust those to whom they might disclose abuse or neglect. The goals of the paper are modest in that we aim simply to open up the debate on how to meet this epistemic challenge, noting that there are specific problems that extend beyond those already identified for hearing the voices of other victims of epistemic injustice. Explicitly recognizing the nature and extent of the problem still leaves us a long way from its solution, but it is a crucial start.
本文考察了导致一群通常被标识为“儿童照料者”或“受照顾儿童”的人被污名化的过程。特别是，我们将研究我们（成年人、专业人员和照顾者）与这些儿童互动的方式，这些儿童既是儿童，也是社会边缘化和弱势群体的成员，以及这些互动模式如何阻碍对话——如果我们要基于对这些儿童需求的更准确理解来构建他们的观念，就需要进行这种对话。这个问题特别具有挑战性，因为我们在照料社区中用来标识这个群体的术语本身就是影响我们与他们互动的破坏性先入之见的产物，我们认为，这一术语也有助于强化这些先入之见。本文结合有关这些儿童虐待和忽视指控在许多案例中如何处理的证据，使用 Fricker 关于认知不公正的研究成果，说明我们在听取该群体成员意见方面存在的问题，以及这对他们自己理解和表达自身经历的能力造成的有害影响。这些问题代表了“披露障碍”，如果我们要建立一个更具包容性的对话，就需要克服这些障碍。目前，这些儿童与负责“照顾”他们的我们之间的对话往往缺乏信任：不仅是儿童觉得自己的话不被认真对待，他们的说法不太可能被相信，而且他们觉得自己不能信任那些可能会披露虐待或忽视的人。本文的目标较为适度，旨在简单地开启关于如何应对这种认知挑战的辩论，指出存在一些特定的问题，这些问题不仅超出了已经确定的为其他认知不公正的受害者发声的问题。明确认识到问题的性质和程度仍然使我们在解决问题方面还有很长的路要走，但这是一个至关重要的起点。
