Journal of Family Violence (2019) 34:565–575

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-018-0028-7

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Young Children’s Narrations of Relational Recovery: a School-Based

Group for Children Who Have Experienced Domestic Violence
Tanya Beetham 1 & Lynne Gabriel 2 & Hazel James 2

Published online: 23 January 2019

# The Author(s) 2019

Abstract
In the UK, domestic violence (DV) is one of the most common safeguarding concerns children and young people report (CAADA,
2014). However, little is known about how children experience participation in interventions that aim to support their recovery if
they have been affected by DV. This study aims to understand children’s experiences of participating in a group programme
facilitated by a DV organisation in the UK. Interviews were conducted with four children (aged 7–10) using a flexible, creative
and child-led approach. A thematic narrative analysis was used, using a small story approach to narrative data. Results indicate that
issues of children’s agency, choice and intersecting identities are central to not only how children experience DV but also how they
experience recovery. Findings highlight the experiential and relational aspect of therapeutic spaces that can enable children to form
relationships and construct meaningful identities. Conclusions suggest that children need to be consulted in inclusive ways in order
to contribute to the development and accessibility of services designed to support them when they have been affected by DV.

Keywords Domestic violence . Children . Childhood . Relationships . Agency . Recovery . Programme

Introduction The importance of involving children in research about

issues which concern them is a central feature of much of
Approximately 25% of children and young people in the UK the literature which cites children’s rights (UNCRC 1989) as
experience DV during childhood (Radford et al. 2013). A vast a framework which their methodological and theoretical ap-
amount of literature details the outcomes of children who live proaches sit within (Cater and Øverlien 2014; Nolas 2011).
with DV, revealing the extent to which children who experi- Children’s direct participation in research is generally accept-
ence DV are at greater risk of developing mental health prob- ed as a way of facilitating better representation of an otherwise
lems, emotional and behavioural difficulties, or experiencing marginalised group (Harcourt and Einarsdottir 2011). The im-
other forms of abuse and neglect (Costa et al. 2015; Howarth plementation of rights-based research has meant that re-
et al. 2016; Radford et al. 2013). Whilst this literature is use- searchers have been able to document children’s coexisting
ful, our concern is that it does little to inform services and agency and vulnerability when they have experienced DV,
practitioners about what can help children to recover from as children describe themselves (Åkerlund 2017; Åkerlund
these experiences. and Sandberg 2017; Callaghan et al. 2015; Lapierre et al.
2017; Øverlien, 2017; Swanston et al. 2014). These findings
Hazel James is currently an independant scholar. significantly challenge what has been described as a discourse
of ‘damage’ (Callaghan et al. 2015), by offering a relational
* Tanya Beetham and child centred picture of how children make sense of and
[email protected] cope with violence. However, despite evidence which iden-
tifies a range of ways in which children’s lives are affected by
Lynne Gabriel DV, there is still little in the form of an understanding of how
[email protected]
children experience the services that they may access.
Hazel James We located one systematic review on the effectiveness of
[email protected] interventions for children, young people and families
1 (Howarth et al. 2016). However, there was only one UK study
University of Stirling, Stirling FK9 4LA, Scotland
2
included, and conclusions were too inconsistent to draw any
York St John University, Lord Mayor’s Walk, York YO31 7EX, UK
566 J Fam Viol (2019) 34:565–575

meaningful conclusions. We conducted our own review of the inequalities mean that children’s perspectives are less likely to
intervention literature and found a similar picture, only locat- be accounted for (Eriksson and Appel Nissen 2017; Iversen
ing one intervention evaluation published in the UK in the last 2014). This is a particular problem in research which is consid-
ten years (Smith et al. 2015) in which the Domestic Abuse ered sensitive and in service settings in which adult-centric
Recovering Together (DART) Programme was evaluated. views regarding outcomes generally dominate. Eriksson and
Similarly, results were inconsistent across and between parent, Appel Nissen (2017) argue that adult ‘expertise’ presents a risk
practitioner and child feedback and outcomes. Importantly, of overlooking children’s own meaning-making, identities and
intervention evaluations do not necessarily seek to gather chil- expertise about their own lives, reproducing societal control by
dren’s views about the experience of their participation; rather, constructing and reproducing normative ways to ‘be’.
questions are typically concerned about effectiveness, rather In this paper, we use the term ‘experienced’ domestic vio-
than experience. There is little qualitative research which lence (DV) to refer to children who might otherwise be de-
shines light on how children themselves experience group scribed as being ‘exposed’ to, or ‘witnesses’ to DV (Callaghan
treatment and programmes in DV service contexts. Our study et al. 2015; Överlien and Hydén 2009). We use the term ‘ex-
contributes to the evidence by interviewing children and gath- perience’, as a way of acknowledging that children do not
ering their experiences and perspectives about their participa- simply witness violence, but DV affects the whole family
tion in a group programme. (Cooper and Vetere 2005). Our reason for this is that we view
With the above in mind, Houghton's (2015) research is note- language as a central feature of acknowledging children as
worthy. She consulted young people about their participation in active agents (Burman 2017). Our study draws on the work
DV services, concluding that: young people need more inter- of Cater (2014) and Eriksson and Appel Nissen (2017) to
vention earlier, fun and friendship are important aspects of support our argument that children’s views about their treat-
receiving support, and young people need their voices to be ment, intervention and service participation need to be taken
taken seriously by professionals. However, few researchers seriously. We view children as able to contribute to these dis-
have consulted with children themselves, particularly younger cussions in meaningful ways. We take a poststructural femi-
children, about their own needs and experiences of services. nist position (Davies 1991), seeking to explore power rela-
Pernebo and Almqvist (2016) appear to be the only researchers tions through which stories are told. Further, we view children
who have consulted with children under the age of 12. They as active agents, simultaneously being shaped by, and shaping
conducted a small-scale study across two services in Sweden their environment, in and through power relations (Burman
interviewing nine 4–6 year olds about their experiences of par- 2017).
ticipating in a group programme. They found children were
enthusiastic to talk about the relationships they made with Aims and Objectives
peers, challenging the assumption that children who experience
trauma and DV are more likely to struggle to build meaningful This study explores children’s experiences of an 8-week group
peer relationships (Radford et al. 2013). programme for children affected by DV. We aim to offer mean-
We argue that the absence of young children’s voices in DV ingful knowledge to service and clinical contexts that provide
service research presents problems. We suggest this absence support to children and families affected by DV. Secondly, we
speaks to ethical dilemmas childhood researchers encounter. aim to contribute to the work of others (Callaghan et al. 2015;
Due to risk-averse ethics procedures (Scott and Fonseca 2010) Øverlien, 2017; Pernebo and Almqvist 2017) who challenge
and additional ethical complexities of research about sensitive dominant discourses of damage and passivity in the context of
topics (DV) with populations considered to be vulnerable DV. Thirdly, we aim to extend the work of Pernebo and
(children), children do not tend to be consulted themselves Almqvist (2016) who highlight younger children’s views of
(Holt et al. 2017). Fears around protecting children from sen- participating in a group programme. Our study extends
sitive and traumatising issues still dominate the literature, de- Pernebo and Almqvist's (2016) work by offering a narrative-
spite arguments which seek to balance children’s right to par- informed analysis, accounting for children’s psychosocial con-
ticipation as well as their right to protection (Harcourt and texts. Further, we offer a UK-based perspective and an analysis
Einarsdottir 2011) and despite researchers (Cater and of children’s experiences of accessing a service delivered in a
Øverlien 2014; Eriksson and Näsman 2012) who argue that school-based context.
children are indeed competent research informants and are The group was an 8-week therapeutic programme for chil-
capable of articulating their experiences and perspectives in dren who had experienced DV. The programme was devel-
DV research. oped and facilitated by two children’s workers and delivered
We also suggest that due to children’s epistemic status in in a school. The programme adopted a strengths-based partic-
society, age-based assumptions position them as less competent ipatory approach, aiming to build resilience and empower
sources of meaningful knowledge. Consequently, despite children by supporting them to make sense of their previous
rights-based frameworks, it is likely that age-based power experiences of DV and facilitating the creative exploration of
J Fam Viol (2019) 34:565–575 567

emotions, feelings, relationships and needs (Lee et al. 2012). (for instance, a mentor, a counsellor or wellbeing worker).
The programme was manual-based, but aimed to be flexible, Therefore, taking some time out was not unusual for the
enabling facilitators to respond to each child’s needs and the school culture and children’s every-day experience.
group dynamic. However, as interviews require confidentiality, we were care-
ful to ensure teachers were aware of this. We maintained con-
tact with them to work with them to negotiate appropriate
Method times accordingly, to ensure minimal risk of an uncomfortable
situation for the child. Children were consulted in an on-going
Participants way to ensure their consent. As the children had chosen for the
researcher to visit school to do the interview, they were gen-
Four children aged 7–10 took part in this study (Table 1). All erally enthusiastic to show the researcher around ‘their’
participants had completed the same programme at the same ground (including their classrooms, the corridors and the
time. The programme was delivered between March–May lunch hall) – this was experienced as a way of inviting the
2016. Children were interviewed in May 2016. Five children researcher ‘in’.
participated in the programme, and all five children were in- The interviewer used flexible topic guides as a loosely semi-
vited to be interviewed, although one child did not attend the structured interview schedule (Table 2). As we approached inter-
last few group sessions. Although he and his mother still pro- views in a child-led way, the topic guides were given to the
vided consent for him to be interviewed for this study, the children on printed out cards to choose which ones they wanted
interview did not take place due to practical issues. This is to talk about, which ones they wanted to leave, and there were
important to note as his absence was noted by the children some blank cards to add any other topics they felt were impor-
who had built what they described as positive relationships tant. None of the children wrote their own topics; rather, they
with each other. Therefore, although five children participated responded to prompts and further questions in interviews. The
in the programme, four were interviewed. All children had interviewer had a range of creative materials available for the
experienced DV prior to their participation in the group for a children to use, to facilitate discussion, if they wanted to. The
significant period of their lives. children had also created a range of materials from each group
session (including drawings, pictures and objects). The children
Data Gathering were invited to bring some of their favourite things from the
programme to the interview. Each child selected a range of ob-
One to one semi-structured interviews, using creative methods jects, drawings and photographs to bring and they were invited to
to facilitate discussion, were conducted one week after the talk about the importance of them in the interviews. It was
completion of the programme. Interviews were conducted intended for this to prompt discussion about the group in a way
by the first author and they were 30–60 min in length. In an which centralised issues that were important to the child.
effort to adopt a child-led and collaborative approach, the Methodological literature about research with children em-
interviewer consulted with the children about their preferred phasises the importance of child-appropriate creative methods
method of participation and their preferred location (we sug- to facilitate participation (Darbyshire et al. 2005; Harris et al.
gested a group interview, interviews in pairs/with a friend or 2015). Such methods are suggested because it is assumed that
individual interviews, and we suggested the school or the DV methods should be adjusted in order to accommodate for
service as a location. We did not think the university premises
would be appropriate). Each child chose to be interviewed
individually at their school. Children were interviewed during Table 2 Interview topic guide
class-time or break-time as chosen by them and agreed with
the school. In the schools, it was usual for some children to 1. What was it like to come to the group?
leave classes or leave break-time to see another professional 2. ‘The fantastic respectful helpful sharing thoughts and feelings group’ –
how did you choose the group’s name? why?
Table 1 Participants 3. What were the best and worst things about the group?
4. Look together at the pictures and creative work you’ve chosen to bring
Participant pseudonym Age Gender – can you tell me a little bit more about them?
5. Has anything changed in your life since coming to the group?
Jack 9 Male
6. What would you tell [the children’s workers] about how they can help
Liam 7 Male other children?
Sophie 8 Female 7. Did it feel like you had a choice about coming to the group?
Jo 10 Female
This table provides an outline of the interview topic guide. It was used
This table provides the pseudonyms, ages, and genders of the participants flexibly, in response to each individual participant
568 J Fam Viol (2019) 34:565–575

children’s age and developmental stages. However, these pro- Analysis

posals have been challenged because of the age-based assump-
tions that underpin ideas that creative methods should be used A thematic narrative analysis was used, informed by
for all children because they will be ‘fun’ (Punch 2002). We did poststructural feminism (an aim to centralise social structures
not assume that the child’s age was an immediate indicator of and power relations) (Davies 1991). We used a thematic narrative
their preferred method of communication and participation. analysis due to our concerns about the lack of contextualisation
Drawing materials and toys were available during interviews, of children’s voices in DV research (Åkerlund and Gottzén
but they were not used in a structured way. Children chose to 2017). A narrative approach enabled us to ensure that our anal-
draw and talk (Einarsdottir et al. 2009) or play and talk ysis directly explored the context of children’s lives, addressing
(Christensen and James 2000) and interviewer used children’s power relations as central (Andrews et al. 2013).
drawings or play to facilitate the interview. Due to the small Our analysis consisted of two stages. Firstly, interview
number of participants, interviews were not piloted, although transcripts were coded, categorised and thematised for initial
the researcher adopted a responsive approach to interviews by analysis (drawing on Braun and Clarke's (2006) thematic anal-
remaining flexible according to each child. ysis). Two researchers analysed each transcript independently
and compared for similarities and differences. There were
Ethics similar themes across both researchers’ analysis. Secondly,
we used Georgakopoulou (2006) and Bamberg's (2006)
This research received ethical approval from York St John theorisation of ‘big’ and ‘small’ stories to extend our analysis
University’s Health and Life Sciences Faculty Ethics and apply a narrative lens to the initial themes we identified.
Committee. Ensuring the protection and safety of children is a We took a ‘small story’ approach, considering the data as
well-documented concern of researchers who acknowledge chil- narrative data. We analysed the small stories of the pro-
dren’s right to participation, and their right to protection gramme that children told, in relation to the social, cultural
(Houghton 2015). We took an ‘ethics as process’ approach and ideological contexts in which they were told. By ‘small
(Frank 2004) and considered ethics as on-going, relational and stories’ we use Georgakopoulou's (2006) definition: these are
contextual. Following gatekeeper approval, we sought verbal the stories that are told in a ‘non-canonical’ way. In other
consent to participate from the children and written consent from words, stories that might be non-linear, fragmented, and not
their parent/caregiver. The DV agency acted as gatekeepers, as told in the context of a life-story, but stories that still matter
participants were children who were already referred to the agen- and can tell us something meaningful about (a) an experience
cy and on the waiting list to receive support. As usual practice, and (b) context(s). Narrative theorists suggest that analysing
the agency conducted risk assessments to confirm that the child the relationship(s) between stories and the social and ideolog-
was living in safety and that the abusive parent did not live with ical discourses drawn on in the telling of the stories, is mean-
them at the time of participating in the programme and this study. ingful (Andrews 2006; Bamberg and Andrews 2004). These
Therefore, for the child’s participation in this study, we sought small stories were identified through our initial thematic anal-
consent from the non-abusive parent (in all cases, the mother) ysis by adopting an iterative approach and returning to tran-
and not the abusive parent. Seeking consent was supported scripts based on initial themes, to understand the context of the
through gatekeeper access to the parent and child upon initial telling of that story (i.e. what is the relationship between the
referral to the DV service and assessment for the group stories the participant tells?). Our final themes were identified
programme. by analysing the relationship between the small stories told,
Due to the potential sensitive nature of interviews, children and the social, cultural and ideological narratives which were
only participated if the programme facilitators judged the risk of present in the context of the children’s lives.
distress to be minimal. In general, children were enthusiastic to
share their experiences of the programme, and it was considered
unlikely for interviews to be distressing. Interviews were de- Results
signed to enable children to choose how they participated and
which topics they discussed. Due to the risks associated with the Four themes were identified: (a) having fun, (b) agency and
identifiability of children and their families, confidentiality was choice in service and school contexts, (c) negotiating intersecting
considered seriously. The interviewer remained in contact with identities, and (d) relational recoveries. In our analysis, we make
the DV agency throughout the project, to ensure the safety of reference to a ‘Top Tips’ poster, created by the children, who
children and discuss any instances arising which may increase were keen for us to share their ideas. The poster is property of
risk. This was particularly necessary during recruitment; howev- the DV agency and therefore potentially risks revealing the loca-
er, the DV agency provided gatekeeper protection and used their tion and identities of participants. Therefore, to protect the ano-
usual assessment and safeguarding protocols, therefore at the nymity of participants we have presented the list the children
point of the research interview, risk was considered to be low. made in a table (Table 3).
J Fam Viol (2019) 34:565–575 569

Table 3 Children’s ‘Top Tips’ Like Jo, Sophie drew on the concept of having ‘fun’, in order
Children who participated in the group programme collaboratively to articulate what making a new friend in the group, was like.
created this list (extracted from a poster), in which they outline their Additionally, Sophie’s use of the term ‘blah blah’ might seem
‘Top Tips’ for practitioners who work with children who have been relatively ‘child-like’. This articulation of ‘fun’ could be un-
affected by domestic violence. derstood as a negotiation and expectation of the interviewer’s
‘Top Tips for any adults who work with children living in families that position as an adult who, based on the socio-political space of
sometimes argue and fight’
the school, she might have expected to be disinterested in what
• Come and talk to us if you know something has happened at home
she had to say. However, when she was asked if she could
• Be kind
explain what she meant, she said: ‘It’s all the talking [in
• Stay calm
school] – no you shouldn’t do this, yes you should do that,
• Listen to us
no you can’t…’. Sophie re-negotiated her position as an active
• Don’t treat us like babies
agent through the relational space of the interview. Firstly, this
• Don’t keep asking us the same questions
enabled her to articulate her sense of the constraining rules and
• Talk to us about other things, not just about home boundaries of school and to describe the importance of a space
• Plan activities so we don’t have to just talk which enabled fun. Secondly, this interaction with Sophie also
• Take our mind off it points towards a relational negotiation with the interviewer. It
could be said that the relational space enabled her to
(re)negotiate her position as ‘child’ and articulate what she
Having Fun intended to communicate.
We view the telling of these small stories as a context-specific
Fun is not a narrative resource assumed to be available to and relational (re)negotiation of discourses which propose chil-
children who have experienced DV due to widespread as- dren affected by DV may not be able to have fun in a meaningful
sertions in academic and practice discourse that children way. It could be assumed the social and academic discourse of
who experience DV have greater challenges in peer relation- vulnerability of children exposed to DV means these types of
ships and are more likely to experience mental health diffi- programmes ‘should’ be filled with distress and risk. From a
culties (Radford et al. 2013). This produces the assumption narrative lens (Bamberg and Andrews 2004), this canonical ex-
that it is unlikely ‘fun’ is something these children can, and pectation is disrupted by the small stories of the participants. Our
will, experience. Contrary to this, children told numerous analysis does not minimise or mitigate these stories of vulnera-
small stories of ‘fun’. It was one of the most frequently bility; however, our small story approach has identified many
discussed concepts introduced by all the children. Often, stories of fun and play, suggesting these themes are central to
when asked about the programme activities, children did children’s recoveries; specifically, the accessibility of fun in, and
not describe the particular activity in detail, rather, they through, relationships.
spoke about the experiential aspect of being in the group
which they described as ‘fun’. Agency and Choice in Service and School Contexts
Liam stated ‘it were very fun’ and Jo felt the most important
thing was everybody ‘got to share ideas together’, emphasising The theme of agency and choice was central to how children
that she experienced this sense of being together, as fun and narrated their small stories of participation in the programme.
freeing. Within the theme of ‘fun’, participants told multiple Whilst children described many instances of having fun, there
small stories of relationships with each other (for instance, jokes were also coexisting stories of choices that appeared to be
they would tell, or the value of doing activities together rather constrained. These intersecting stories reveal the complexity
than on their own). All participants spoke about the relationships of enjoying the group, whilst negotiating the constraints on the
formed in the group. For Jo, it was simply ‘doing it [the group]’ choices available to children in the context of school and a DV
and doing it ‘together’ that was meaningful. It was not what they service. Children described having fun and making friends,
did, but how they did it that mattered most to her. Likewise, highlighting multiple positive aspects of the group.
Sophie suggested that having fun was like a day without the ‘blah However, they also highlighted that they did not wish to be
blah’: treated ‘like babies’ (Table 1). This statement links to their
consistent references in the interviews to choice and power.
Interviewer: so what was it like to be able to make such Not wishing to be treated like babies is indicative of the
a special friend in the group? relationality of their agency and choice regarding how they
Sophie: it was like a day without the blah blah experienced the intervention. Jo articulated that although she
Interviewer: a day without the blah blah? enjoyed the group, she was aware, particularly at the begin-
Sophie: yeah, I could forget about it all and just have ning about the lack of information made available to her,
fun. which was a source of worry.
570 J Fam Viol (2019) 34:565–575

The scariest thing was meeting new people because all I ending. However, she positioned these feelings alongside
was told was that there would be other children going, I her sense of lacking choice about her participation. For
didn’t know who was going. All I knew was that it was Sophie, it was important she could come in her ‘own time’.
you guys doing it but the only person I knew was [the Her choice and agency were reoccurring topics of discussion
children’s worker] because she used to work with my in the interview. When asked about her ideas about a better
cousin and she didn’t [pause] but, but my cousin doesn’t way for it to be, she explained:
need it any more so she came to do it with me.
If it was like in school times or something, and we could
She followed this articulation of feeling uncertain, with ‘I go when we wanted to go. If we were in lessons and we
enjoyed it though, I enjoy new schools’, before explaining that wanted to go, we could just say erm, I need to go to the
‘I felt happy that I had the choice about every time I wanted to group. Like so we could come in our own time… it isn’t
come’. Jo articulated two contradictory small stories here; one of good when people force you to go, is it?
worry about meeting new people and not having access to infor-
mation, and another of having choice and enjoying the very Likewise, Jo also discussed her initial worries. She said:
unknown newness she described feeling worried about.
According to narrative theory (Georgakopoulou 2006), these We could have had a show around as a starter to see
stories are told in a non-canonical and fragmented way, but rather where we were going to be and who we were going to be
than presenting problems for analysis, the interaction between with. Stuff like that… mhmm [on the first day] I didn’t
these stories is precisely our point of interest. We suggest this even know where I was going. I just arrived at [the
reveals the importance of children making active choices regard- school] and I just saw you and [the facilitators] and I
ing their participation in services. It also reveals the relationality was just like OK I’m really excited now but then I was
of agency and the complexity of articulating this to a researcher nervous as well.
who is both part of a school (an adult in school context), part of
the DV service (a researcher attached to the service she has Although Jo and Sophie expressed their concerns, they com-
participated in), yet also is not fully situated in both, and is si- municated their anticipation and curiosity about the group,
multaneously a curious person who wanted to hear her stories. and suggested possible ways to improve the group. Jo’s above
Jo’s participation in the group was a positive experience, articulation: ‘I’m really excited now but then I was nervous as
but she still recognised her need for a sense of autonomy about well’ speaks to the complexity of the intersecting positions we
how and when she participated. Sophie had a similar describe here: these small stories of attending the programme
experience: are filled with newness, unknowns, relationships and fun.
Notably, children actively negotiated their social positioning
Interviewer: do you think that you wanted to come [to through the narration of their small stories. (New) Sociology
the group] yourself? of childhood scholars have critiqued the positioning of child-
Sophie: my mum. My mum made me come… I just hood as a time of development, dependency and freedom,
wanted to see what it was like yeah, but I wanted to go arguing for the need to view children as active agents
see some friends and stuff, after school and stuff. I (Wyness 2012). Scholars who challenge the binary posi-
wanted to skip some to see my friends, but my mum said tioning of childhood and adulthood have also challenged
no you have to go every week like every other person the framing of childhood as a time of becoming rather
like every after school club, you’ve got to go. I was like than being (Burman 2017; Twamley et al. 2017). Power
uuuuurgh mummy relations that underpin this categorical view of childhood
Interviewer: That’s tough? So OK [pause] so maybe and (lack of) agency, position children as less competent
sometimes there were times when you didn’t really want to offer views which are taken seriously (Burman 2017).
to come because maybe you wanted to play with your Consequently, ideological discourses of dependency and
friends, but your mum made you come becoming (rather than being) minimise the importance of
Sophie: yeah children making choices. Our analysis of children’s narra-
Interviewer: so how did you feel when your mum made tions of small stories suggests that the relationality of
you come? choice and agency are crucial to consider in the delivery
Sophie: [uses an ‘upset’ toy bear to show the of children’s programmes.
expression]
Negotiating Intersecting Identities
Interestingly, Sophie was the most expressive about her per-
spective regarding her positive experiences of the group. She DV is typically a non-normative childhood experience, in that it
expressed fondness of the group and sadness at the group diverges from what children ‘should’ experience in childhood
J Fam Viol (2019) 34:565–575 571

(O’Dell et al. 2018). Consequently, children and families affected Relational Recoveries
by DV are typically positioned as ‘other’ in social discourse. As
highlighted by Morrow (2011), a ‘broken home’ discourse can With little or no prompting, all children spoke about relation-
be profoundly impactful. This marginalisation through normative ships in their lives, suggesting it is important to consider the
ideologies about risk, family life and vulnerability, was evident in significance of these relationships and children’s psychosocial
the way children narrated their small stories of the programme contexts, when they access services. First on Jack’s agenda
and their everyday lives. In the interviews, children shifted the was to tell the interviewer about the significant relationships
focus of their talk away from the programme and towards other in his life: ‘I’ve got lots of uncles… I’ve forgot them cos I don’t
aspects of their lives. This suggests that although the group see them very often’. However, unlike the other children,
was experienced as ‘fun’ and beneficial, it was also expe- Sophie did not discuss her family members, apart from when
rienced as a space in which they negotiated their identities she positioned her mother as ‘forcing’ her to attend the inter-
as children in families where there has been DV. vention. In fact, she positioned friendships as central, as she
Children’s methods of shifting their talk to other topics described the importance of her new friendship with Jo, and
speaks to the need to recognise children’s other stated ‘you can’t break friendships can you?’
intersecting identities. Jack’s references to his hobbies It was clear that the children had made meaningful relation-
suggests it is important to consider all aspects of chil- ships with each other. Each child described the value they
dren’s lives and identities, in spite of the DV, which led placed on their new friendships, again, highlighting the psy-
him to access the service. chosocial and relational aspect of their experiences of the pro-
gramme. Given that the children made friendships within the
Jack: but if [the group] was on a Thursday I’d have to group, the group’s ending was particularly significant to most
rush home and then to the gym now of the children, who expressed their wish for the group to last
Interviewer: ahh yeah, now you go to boxing after longer.
school then after school wouldn’t really be that great?
Do you think that it would have been better during Interviewer: we said that the best thing about the group
school time or do you think after school still would be was Liam and the worst thing for you was leaving
good? [pause]. Do you think if the group were to carry on then
Jack: during school you’d keep going?
Interviewer: so if [the facilitators] did the group again Jack: yeah
for other children? Interviewer: Ah, how long do you think the group could
Jack: during school, so I could play on my X Box for have gone on for if it was the right way for you?
longer at home. Jack: Forever

All children highlighted their need to be treated as individuals Jack also explained ‘the best thing was meeting Liam… Leaving
with lives that exist outside of DV. From a narrative small the group was the worst thing… Liam is my best friend now’.
story perspective, the fragmentation and non-canonical way Likewise, Jo explained that the group ending was a celebration,
of telling these stories would seem like a disorganised struc- but she also experienced conflicting emotions because she did
ture of narrating experiences of the programme that children not want to leave. ‘When I graduated I felt happy and I didn’t
knew the interviewer was interested in. However, as we are want to leave… but I have got my book and my pen and now I
interested in what this non-canonical storytelling can reveal by can just write.’. Sophie also attributed much of her meaningful
analysing the relation between the stories told and the context changes to her new friendship with Jo: ‘I feel like a different
of their telling, there is something meaningful in acknowledg- person… I didn’t have any friends, but [Jo], she changed that…’.
ing how children negotiate ideological discourses about child- These stories of relationships were central to each of the
hood, vulnerability and family life. Children were keen to talk themes we identified, but it is also a theme that needs to be
about the different things in their lives that were, and contin- recognised itself. Our small story analysis recognises the
ued to be, crucial aspects of their identities. They did not want relationality of both being in the group (relationships with
the group (and research interviews) to disrupt other things in their peers), and when relationships outside the group influ-
their lives, such as lessons, seeing friends, and other activities enced the experience of the programme (for instance, families
(such as football, boxing, WhatsApp and the X Box). This can and others outside of the immediate group context). Children’s
also be seen in their ‘Top Tips’ (Table 1) poster in which narrations of these small stories reveals the ways in which
children suggested that DV professionals should ‘talk (to chil- children de-individualise their recovery trajectory by actively
dren) about other things, not just things at home’. Therefore, positioning themselves in multiple relationships. Social and
we suggest that it is important for children’s intersecting iden- practice discourse assumes that children who experience DV
tities to be recognised and valued in DV service contexts. are likely to struggle to build meaningful relationships
572 J Fam Viol (2019) 34:565–575

(Radford et al. 2013) and that recovery can be marked by the children may be ‘infantilized’ (ibid. p. 245), and children are
improvement of individual symptomology (Lee et al. 2012) – positioned in a ‘needs’ discourse (Devine 2000) dependent on
therefore overlooking the relationality of recovery. We do not adults. Our findings suggest that in school spaces or DV service
suggest that symptomology should be ignored, but we do spaces, such power relations can be (re)negotiated by children.
propose an alternative extended picture – that recovery can Our findings support the notion that children play an active role
be viewed as relational too. in not only how they negotiate relational encounters and con-
texts during DV (Åkerlund and Sandberg 2017; Øverlien &
Aas, 2016), but in their recoveries too. Children resisted the
Discussion ideological and social discourse that children affected by DV
cannot have ‘fun’, by co-constructing spaces and narrating
Our findings point to the experiential and relational aspect of small stories in which not only was ‘fun’ allowed, but fun could
therapeutic spaces that enabled children in this study to form be had in, and through, meaningful relationships.
relationships and construct meaningful identities. In our dis- The theorisation of children as agentic in DV contexts chal-
cussion, we explore the value of analysing the contexts in lenges the outcomes evidence which is based on a deficit
which children narrate stories of fun and friendships. We also model, and positions children who experience DV as lacking
highlight the relationality of children’s agency and choice in capacity to cope effectively (Callaghan et al. 2015; Överlien
DV service and school settings. We extend the theorisation of 2017). Children in our study described experiences of having
children’s coping during DV as relational and agentic, and fun and making friends. This extends theorisations of children
suggest that children’s recoveries can be described as relation- as agentic not only during their experiences of DV but during
al and agentic too. Our results have implications for a range of their recoveries too. Children asserted their positions as active
practitioners, services and researchers who aim to support and agents, with identities that extend beyond that of being a child
improve the lives of children and families who are affected by from a ‘broken home’. This adds to Pernebo and Almqvist
DV. Therefore, we do not tailor our discussion for a specific (2016)‘s findings. Children they interviewed also highlighted
discipline or practice. We take an inter-disciplinary and cross- having fun and developing peer relationships as a crucial as-
disciplinary approach, due to the range of ways in which our pect of their experiences of participating in a group pro-
results contribute to research, practice and theory. gramme. Our study extends Pernebo and Almqvist’s (2016)
The small story approach (Bamberg 2006; findings: not only did children form meaningful peer relation-
Georgakopoulou 2006) to analysing narrative data means that ships, but their experience of activities, their experience of
we have contextualised children’s voices and understood them beginning and ending, and their articulations of agency and
as relationally and contextually produced (Andrews 2006). choice was relational.
This approach to narrative analysis has enabled us to identify This emphasis on relationality also revealed the importance
children’s (at times) fragmented, contradictory, non-canonical, of recognising that although living in a family that has expe-
but meaningful experiences and perspectives in relation to the rienced DV has led children to access service, it is not the only
programme they participated in. Narrative theorists have thing that constitutes their sense of self. From a narrative lens
highlighted that analysing the relations between contradictory (Bamberg and Andrews 2004), the vulnerability and broken-
and fragmented stories is not only fruitful, but it is precisely ness associated with living in a family affected by DV is not
within these spaces that meaning and stories are produced the only narrative through which participants narrated the
(Bamberg and Andrews 2004) Stories of fun and friendships ‘self’. We suggest that children narrated multiple intersecting
co-existed with stories of constrained choices and complex identities through their numerous small stories: those directly
negotiations of power. Coexisting relational positions and related to the programme, and those which seemingly were
ideological discourses about childhood, recovery and family not related to the programme (i.e. the X Box, the gym, their
life, informed how children described their participation in family relationships). There are two points in relation to the
this programme. We have identified the importance of choice, implications of this finding. Firstly, we suggest it is crucial to
agency and enabling space to explore and value intersecting acknowledge the violence and abuse that children have expe-
identities in a service context. rienced and offer a means through which to explore and ex-
The group programme was delivered in a school, typically a press feelings around their experiences. Additionally, we ar-
space in which power relations are adult-dominated (Devine gue that it is meaningful to offer children choices about how
2000). Children’s articulation of friendships and fun can be and when they talk about their experiences, and to explore and
understood as a negotiation of power relations within which value other aspects of their identities too.
children’s lives are situated. Our interpretation of these small Choice and agency were central features of how children
stories of fun and friendships is based on the assumption that described their experiences of the group programme. They
schools are spaces in which children are often positioned as described positive experiences of peer relationships, and de-
‘objects of schooling’ (Rosen and Twamley 2018, p. xi), scribed the group as fun and something they would miss.
J Fam Viol (2019) 34:565–575 573

However, these experiences were also articulated alongside and consent are on-going, relational and dynamic. It is crucial
narrations of constrained choices: choice around participation, for adults in children’s lives to consider these issues and ex-
accessibility of information about the programme, and how plore more, how they can use their epistemological positions
and when they could attend. How and when children engage as ‘experts’ to facilitate children’s choices in contexts within
with services is a timely issue for discussion, given the which they typically have little choice.
prioritisation of early intervention in the UK (Howarth et al.
2016). This early intervention agenda has also been extensive- Limitations and Further Research
ly critiqued because of the way in which it works to simulta-
neously centralise and marginalise parents and families who We recognise that this study has limitations. We interviewed
already live on the ‘margins’ (Featherstone et al. 2014; four children, and although we do not claim generalisability,
Macvarish et al. 2015). We suggest the early intervention this is still a small sample size. We also do not claim to shine
agenda works on an individualistic level, and does not cen- light on the effectiveness of the programme, rather we were
tralise the psychosocial and relational contexts children de- concerned about how children experienced it. Participants in
scribed as fundamental to their experiences of participation. this study were all white British children and do not represent
It has been suggested that children’s readiness to talk and a racial, cultural or ethnically diverse account of how different
engage is one important consideration (Iversen 2014). Whilst children experience a DV service programme. This was not a
readiness is important, it should be acknowledged that this purposeful sampling decision, rather it was based on the chil-
assumption suggests ‘failure’ to engage might be due to lack dren who were accessing service at the time of recruitment.
of readiness. We argue that this is an individualising way to The invisibility of minority group children, and the
view engagement with services, and it lacks consistency with normativity of a Westernised culture is widely critiqued
how the children in this study described their perspectives. (Burman 2017; O’Dell et al. 2018). This normalising mecha-
Engagement must be considered contextually. None of the nism through which Eurocentric norms are established, and
children in this study referred to feeling ready, but they all others are pathologised, is not sufficiently addressed in DV
spoke of choice and power, suggesting that how they were research. Future research should seek to include the views and
approached and informed about the programme was central. experiences of a more diverse range of children affected by
Information about programmes and services, and treating DV. There is a need to extend understandings about how chil-
choice and consent as relational, on-going and open to the dren experience DV services and interventions. We suggest
possibility of change, is crucial. that researchers should seek to present contextualised analyses
Stanley and Humphreys (2015) recognised that children of children’s perspectives by considering the contexts in
typically have little choice about their referrals and which children’s voices are produced. Finally, we argue chil-
involvement with services, whilst Cater (2014) argued that dren offer significant expertise about their own lives – there-
children’s choice about participation in services could be more fore greater participation of children in the design of research
powerful than participation itself. Houghton's (2015) work methods and support services is needed.
with young people in Scotland also revealed that young peo-
ple said that professionals should trust them to talk about DV
how, and when, they wish. Our study supports Houghton Conclusions
(2015) and Cater's (2014) arguments. Participation, agency
and choice are central themes. However, agency as a concept, It is crucial to centralise children’s choices about how and
is argued to be better understood relationally and contextually when they access services, participate in programmes, and talk
(Valentine 2011). We therefore suggest that readiness to en- about their experiences of DV. The peer relationships children
gage should not be down to the child only; rather, considering form can be central to their experience of participating in
children’s psychosocial contexts is crucial. Sophie’s explana- services. Children in this study valued space to form mean-
tion, that sometimes her mother ‘forced’ her to attend the ingful relationships and have fun, emphasising that having fun
group, demonstrates this. Whilst Sophie was keen to express ‘together’ was crucial. Further to this, we argue that not only
the positive impact the programme had on her life, she still are relationships important to children’s recoveries, but that
emphasised choice. She explained that choice meant not only recovery can be described as relational. Although children
choice about consenting to participate, but that choice and described positive experiences, it is also the responsibility of
consent was on-going. She suggested a drop-in group would researchers to hear the complexity of how positive experi-
be best. Although drop-ins might be impractical for services, ences are articulated too. We have found a narrative analysis
her message is important. Cater and Øverlien (2014) highlight an appropriate methodology to support the identification of
that it is a rare experience for children to be taken seriously contradictory and complex speaking positions. Whilst all par-
because they are rarely considered competent informants. We ticipants described fun, friendships and positive benefits of the
therefore take Sophie’s message seriously, that choice, agency group, they also articulated constrained choices and
574 J Fam Viol (2019) 34:565–575

negotiations of intersecting identities which were situated in Andrews, M. (2006). I. Breaking down barriers: Feminism, politics and
psychology. Feminism & Psychology, 16(1), 13–17. https://doi.org/
adult-child power relations, in contexts that do not often pro-
10.1177/0959-353506060814.
mote the epistemic status of children. We therefore suggest Andrews, M., Squire, C., & Tamboukou, M. (2013). Doing narrative
that children’s services should consider children’s psychoso- research (2nd ed.). London: Sage.
cial contexts and issues of relational power, agency and choice Bamberg, M. (2006). Stories: Big or small: Why do we care? Narrative
Inquiry, 16(1), 139–147. https://doi.org/10.1075/ni.16.1.18bam.
when designing and delivering programmes for children af-
Bamberg, M., & Andrews, M. (2004). Considering counter narratives :
fected by DV. These are particularly relevant conclusions for Narrating, resisting, making sense. Amsterdam: John Benjamins
two issues: firstly, the concept of relationality challenges read- Publishing Company.
iness to engage discourses by offering an alternative view, that Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology.
Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/
it is not only children who we should consider, but readiness
10.1191/1478088706qp063oa.
should be considered relationally by exploring children’s Burman, E. (2017). Deconstructing Developmental Psychology (3rd ed.).
intersecting identities and the broader social contexts of their London: Routledge.
lives. Secondly, our findings point towards a relational view of CAADA. (2014). In plain sight: Effective help for children exposed to
domestic abuse. Retrieved from www.caada.org.uk.
recovery – this offers a different perspective to otherwise dom-
Callaghan, J. E. M., Alexander, J. H., Sixsmith, J., & Fellin, L. C. (2015).
inant individualising notions of recovery trajectories. Beyond Bwitnessing^: Children’s experiences of coercive control in
Our application of a small story analysis offers a substan- domestic violence and abuse. Journal of Interpersonal Violence,
tially different way of viewing stories told by children in non- 33(10), 1551–1581. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260515618946.
linear and contradictory ways. Rather than assuming chil- Cater, Å. K. (2014). Children’s descriptions of participation processes in
interventions for children exposed to intimate partner violence.
dren’s contributions lack consistency because of their age, Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal, 31(5), 455–473.
we take this non-linearity as a point of interest for analysis. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10560-014-0330-z.
This approach has supported the tracing of meaningful power Cater, Å., & Øverlien, C. (2014). Children exposed to domestic violence:
relations. Our analysis of these power relations has enabled us A discussion about research ethics and researchers’ responsibilities.
Nordic Social Work Research, 4(1), 67–79. https://doi.org/10.1080/
to engage more with the notion of negotiating relationality in 2156857X.2013.801878.
contexts which are typically shaped by individualising notions Christensen, P. M., & James, A. (2000). Research with children :
of recovery and distress. We conclude that younger children Perspectives and practices. London: Routledge.
can contribute in meaningful and significant ways to research Cooper, J., & Vetere, A. (2005). Domestic Violence and Family Safety. (J.
Cooper & A. Vetere, Eds.). London: Whurr Publishers Ltd. doi:
such as this, and that narrative methodologies can support the https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470713112.
analysis of complex (small) stories that are narrated in non- Costa, B. M., Kaestle, C. E., Walker, A., Curtis, A., Day, A.,
linear ways. Toumbourou, J. W., & Miller, P. (2015). Longitudinal predictors of
domestic violence perpetration and victimization: A systematic re-
view. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 24, 261–272. https://doi.org/
10.1016/J.AVB.2015.06.001.
Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Darbyshire, P., MacDougall, C., & Schiller, W. (2005). Multiple methods
Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http:// in qualitative research with children: More insight or just more?
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, Qualitative Research, 5(4), 417–436. https://doi.org/10.1177/
distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appro- 1468794105056921.
priate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Davies, B. (1991). The concept of agency: A feminist poststructuralist
Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. analysis. Social Analysis: The International Journal of Social and
CulturalPractice, 30, 42–53. https://doi.org/10.2307/23164525.
Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to juris- Devine, D. (2000). Constructions of childhood in school: Power, policy
dictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. and practice in Irish education. International Studies in Sociology of
Education, 10(1), 23–41.
Einarsdottir, J., Dockett, S., & Perry, B. (2009). Making meaning: chil-
dren’s perspectives expressed through drawings. Early Child
Development and Care, 179(2), 217–232. https://doi.org/10.1080/
References 03004430802666999.
Eriksson, M., & Appel Nissen, M. (2017). Categorization and changing
service user positions. Nordic Social Work Research, 7(3), 183–187.
Åkerlund, N. (2017). Caring or vulnerable children? Sibling relationships https://doi.org/10.1080/2156857X.2017.1378476.
when exposed to intimate partner violence. Children & Society, Eriksson, M., & Näsman, E. (2012). Interviews with children exposed to
31(6), 475–485. https://doi.org/10.1111/chso.12215. violence. Children & Society, 26(1), 63–73. https://doi.org/10.1111/
Åkerlund, N., & Gottzén, L. (2017). Children’s voices in research with j.1099-0860.2010.00322.x.
children exposed to intimate partner violence: A critical review. Featherstone, B., Morris, K., & White, S. (2014). A marriage made in
Nordic Social Work Research, 7(1), 42–53. https://doi.org/10. hell: Early intervention meets child protection. British Journal of
1080/2156857X.2016.1156019. Social Work, 44(7), 1735–1749. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/
Åkerlund, N., & Sandberg, L. J. (2017). Children and violence interac- bct052.
tions: Exploring intimate partner violence and Children’s experi- Frank, A. W. (2004). Ethics as process and practice. Internal Medicine
ences of responses. Child Abuse Review, 26(1), 51–62. https://doi. Journal, 34(6), 355–357. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1445-5994.2004.
org/10.1002/car.2438. 00622.x.
J Fam Viol (2019) 34:565–575 575

Georgakopoulou, A. (2006). Thinking big with small stories in narrative age. Child & Family Social Work, 22(2), 680–688. https://doi.org/
and identity analysis. Narrative Inquiry, 16(1), 122–130. https://doi. 10.1111/cfs.12283.
org/10.1075/ni.16.1.16geo. Överlien, C., & Hydén, M. (2009). Children’s actions when experiencing
Harcourt, D., & Einarsdottir, J. (2011). Introducing children’s perspec- domestic violence. Childhood, 16(4), 479–496. https://doi.org/10.
tives and participation in research. European Early Childhood 1177/0907568209343757.
Education Research Journal, 19(3), 301–307. https://doi.org/10. Pernebo, K., & Almqvist, K. (2016). Young children’s experiences of
1080/1350293X.2011.597962. participating in group treatment for children exposed to intimate
Harris, C., Jackson, L., Mayblin, L., Piekut, A., & Valentine, G. (2015). partner violence: A qualitative study. Clinical Child Psychology
‘Big brother welcomes you’: Exploring innovative methods for re- and Psychiatry, 21(1), 119–132. https://doi.org/10.1177/
search with children and young people outside of the home and 1359104514558432.
school environments. Qualitative Research, 15(5), 583–599. Pernebo, K., & Almqvist, K. (2017). Young children exposed to intimate
https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794114548947. partner violence describe their abused parent: A qualitative study.
Holt, S., Overlien, C., & Devaney, J. (2017). Responding to domestic Journal of Family Violence, 32(2), 169–178. https://doi.org/10.
violence. Emerging challenges for policy, practice and research in 1007/s10896-016-9856-5.
Europe. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers. Punch, S. (2002). Research with children. Childhood, 9(3), 321–341.
Houghton, C. (2015). Young People’s perspectives on participatory https://doi.org/10.1177/0907568202009003005.
ethics: Agency, power and impact in domestic abuse research and
Radford, L., Corral, S., Bradley, C., & Fisher, H. L. (2013). The preva-
policy-making. Child Abuse Review, 24(4), 235–248. https://doi.
lence and impact of child maltreatment and other types of victimi-
org/10.1002/car.2407.
zation in the UK: Findings from a population survey of caregivers,
Howarth, E., Moore, T. H., Welton, N. J., Lewis, N., Stanley, N.,
children and young people and young adults. Child Abuse &
MacMillan, H., Shaw, A., Hester, M., Bryden, P., & Feder, G.
Neglect, 37(10), 801–813. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2013.
(2016). IMPRoving outcomes for children exposed to domestic
02.004.
ViolencE (IMPROVE): An evidence synthesis. Public Health
Research, 4(10), 1–342. https://doi.org/10.3310/phr04100. Rosen, R., & Twamley, K. (2018). Feminism and the politics of child-
Iversen, C. (2014). Predetermined participation: Social workers evaluat- hood: Friends or foes? London: UCL Press. https://doi.org/10.
ing children’s agency in domestic violence interventions. 14324/111.9781787350632.
Ch i l d h oo d , 2 1 ( 2 ) , 2 7 4– 2 8 9. h t t ps : / / d o i . org / 1 0 . 11 7 7/ Scott, C. L., & Fonseca, L. (2010). Overstepping the mark: Ethics proce-
0907568213492804. dures, risky research and education researchers. International
Lapierre, S., Côté, I., Lambert, A., Buetti, D., Lavergne, C., Damant, D., Journal of Research & Method in Education, 33(3), 287–300.
& Couturier, V. (2017). Difficult but close relationships: Children’s https://doi.org/10.1080/1743727X.2010.511710.
perspectives on relationships with their mothers in the context of Smith, E., Belton, E., Barnard, M., Fisher, H. L., & Taylor, J. (2015).
domestic violence. Violence Against Women, 107780121773154, Strengthening the mother-child relationship following domestic
1023–1038. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801217731541. abuse: Service evaluation. Child Abuse Review, 24(4), 261–273.
Lee, J., Kolomer, S., & Thomsen, D. (2012). Evaluating the effectiveness of https://doi.org/10.1002/car.2405.
an intervention for children exposed to domestic violence: A prelimi- Stanley, N., & Humphreys, C. (2015). Domestic violence and protecting
nary program evaluation. Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal, children : new thinking and approaches. (Nicky Stanley and Cathy
29(5), 357–372. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10560-012-0265-1. Humphreys, Ed.). London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.
Macvarish, J., Lee, E., & Lowe, P. (2015). Neuroscience and family Swanston, J., Bowyer, L., & Vetere, A. (2014). Towards a richer under-
policy: What becomes of the parent? Critical Social Policy, 35(2), standing of school-age children’s experiences of domestic violence:
248–269. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261018315574019. The voices of children and their mothers. Clinical Child Psychology
Morrow, V. (2011). Understanding children and childhood. Centre for and Psychiatry, 19(2), 184–201. https://doi.org/10.1177/
Children and Young People, Southern Cross University 1359104513485082.
ePublications@SCU. London. Retrieved November 26, 2018, from Twamley, K., Rosen, R., & Mayall, B. (2017). The (im)possibilities of
https://epubs .scu.edu.au/ cgi/viewcont ent.cgi ?article= dialogue across feminism and childhood scholarship and activism.
1027&context=ccyp_pubs . Accessed 26 Nov 2018. Children’s Geographies, 15(2), 249–255. https://doi.org/10.1080/
Nolas, S.-M. (2011). Reflections on the enactment of children’s partici- 14733285.2016.1227611.
pation rights through research: Between transactional and relational UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC). (1989). Retrieved
spaces. Children and Youth Services Review, 33(7), 1196–1202. March 2, 2018, from https://www.unicef.org.uk/what-we-do/un-
https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CHILDYOUTH.2011.02.014. convention-child-rights/
O’Dell, L., Brownlow, C., & Bertilsdotter Rosqvist, H. (2018). Different Valentine, K. (2011). Accounting for agency. Children & Society, 25(5),
childhoods : Non/normative development and transgressive 347–358. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1099-0860.2009.00279.x.
trajectories. Oxon: Routledge. Wyness, M. (2012). Childhood and Society. 2nd edition. London:
Överlien, C. (2017). ‘Do you want to do some arm wrestling?’: children’s Palgrave Macmillan.
strategies when experiencing domestic violence and the meaning of