between me and the Finnish workers. Now it is easier for me to trust family work. (C1.)
In the clients’ opinion, receiving information about child protection work and correc-ting false assumptions helped them to trust family work. It appears that once the
clients have information regarding the content and purpose of child protection, they feel that they can show confidence in family work. This may be connected to inc-reased feelings of predictability and control (see Ilmonen 2005, 51). We can presume that confidence in child protection as an institution can promote the development of trust towards individual employees. (e.g. Seligman 1997, 18).
Further, the clients talked about an atmosphere of openness that came with the de-velopment of trust:
(52) When the cultural interpreter was present, the discussion was open, and I thought that now it is easier for me to talk and to trust them (C5).
This was probably partly connected to the fact that the clients were able to speak their native language in the cultural interpreter’s presence. However, it is also possible that the feeling of trust partly arises from familiarity, from the shared language and the shared experiences of immigration. In addition, trust can be seen to be linked to a feeling of safety, in which case the clients’ trust towards the cultural interpreter crea-tes a general atmosphere of confidentiality, allowing the clients to trust other workers more easily, as well (see Seligman 2001). The cultural interpreter herself discussed how the generation of trust may have partly been due to her position and her attitude towards the clients:
(53) I’m on the same level with them. I respect them, and they respect me. I give advice, but I do not judge, nor do I make any decisions regarding their life or demand anything, so they don’t have to hide anything from me, eit-her. (CI.)
In the cultural interpreter’s view, there was no great difference in the level of power between her and the clients. She felt that she was on the same level with the clients, which promoted trust. Further, the cultural interpreter brought up respect as a factor in building trust. Respect can be understood as considering the other to be a compe-tent communication partner, and seeing the other’s behavior as sensible in the light of her situation As trust is established, it becomes easier for each party to believe in the information provided by the other (Ikäheimo 2003).
Empowerment takes place most naturally in environments where the person invol-ved feels that the atmosphere is safe, and where she feels that she is accepted and her position is equal to others. It appears that cultural interpretation has promoted the development of such an atmosphere. Another crucial factor for empowerment is the kind of context the person considers to be supportive, appreciative, confidential and unprejudiced, as well as facilitating attainment of her own goals (Siitonen 1999, 143-144, 161). In the course of the cultural interpretation trial, the clients saw a mo-del where trust towards official was being developed. They saw that it is possible to talk to officials about important matters, and that it is safe to accept the help they offer. The cultural interpreter did not work as an official with them, but instead shared similar experiences of immigration and spoke the same language, so it was easier to trust her from the outset. Receiving language support and information on child protection were factors that had a powerful influence on the development of trust. It is
apparent that as mutual trust is established, dialogue-based relationship with workers and personal commitment to the work on the clients’ part become possible. In social work generally, trust is an important element in bringing about positive change (e.g.
Dominelli 2004).
D
iscussionThe goal of our study was to analyze cultural interpretation as working practice that aims to support clients. We focused our attention on the types of mechanisms that prevent or enhance the empowerment of clients of child protection services. In the first part of the article, we discussed various obstacles to cooperation encounte-red by the clients and family workers. Such obstacles should be taken into considera-tion more widely in social work involving immigrant clients. First, the language barrier and difficulties with comprehension hinder empowerment. The primary issue to be solved should be ensuring that the client understands and can be heard by using interpreters. There can hardly be any discussion about trust or building cooperation if the client does not have a clear idea about the purpose of child protection, if she cannot express her thoughts appropriately, or if basic facts cannot be made clear.Secondly, cultural differences and different views on child-rearing were brought up.
However, stating the existence of cultural differences is not a helpful starting point.
Instead, it is important to define more precisely what is meant by cultural difference, in order to get to grips with the actual issues. Also, the Finnish child-centered thinking and child protection may seem alien to the clients, in which case it is important to convey information in a comprehensible form, discuss the issues, and justify decisi-ons. Thirdly, the lack of trust in social workers experienced by the clients hampers the work and drains the family’s resources even further, as many of the respondents feared they would lose their children and did not trust the child protection workers’
willingness to help them. Factors brought up as underlying the lack of trust were the language barrier and lack of information, i.e. issues that can be given concrete na-mes and that can possibly be solved.
In the second part of the article we discussed the empowering elements of cultural interpretation. The results of this study suggest that the clients received from the cultural interpreter: (1) Emotional support, in which case the mechanisms of empo-werment were a positive future outlook created through interaction, getting heard, and the opportunity for self-expression in the native language. (2) Language support was another type of support received from the cultural interpreter. In this case, the mechanisms of empowerment were a feeling of participation, since the clients took part in defining their own situations as active agents, a feeling of managing one’s own life, as the individuals’ understanding of the factors influencing their lives increased, and faster resolution of resource-draining misunderstandings, allowing resources to be targeted at improving the client’s situation. (3) Conveying information had an effect on putting an end to the fears the clients had about child protection, and helped the clients to understand the service system, increasing their opportunities for choice and action. All these mechanisms lead to a sense of security, brought about by removing the insecurity that resulted from lack of information, and by cooperation with child protection becoming comprehensible and predictable, which allows the client to fully participate in it. The general sense of security, in turn, leads to trust and better
coope-ration with workers. In addition, trusting the cultural interpreter has contributed to the development of trust between the clients and other workers, as well.
Although empowerment starts with the person herself, research evidence suggests that it can be supported through action that creates mechanisms which, in turn, sup-port empowerment. In the course of the cultural interpreter services, the clients did gain a sense of internal power, adopt more active roles in defining their situations, and feel that their opportunities for action increased. On the basis of the data, these elements appear to be part of a process of empowerment, which in our view has taken place on three distinct levels: through the clients’ personal, positive feelings and experiences, in client relationships with the workers, and on a societal level, as opportunities for societal action increased.
In the course of the study, we got a strong impression that cultural interpretation can be a holistic and effective working method in the field of social services, as it com-bines foreign language interpretation, peer support and service guidance. However, when developing a model of the service we have to consider the possibility that cultural interpretation is trust-inspiring and effective because it is a so-called para-professional service. By this we mean that while the cultural interpreter has skills in psychology, and she may use these skills in her work with the clients, her position is not that of an official authority, she does not make decisions regarding the clients’
lives, and working with her is not obligatory. Thus the clients receive support from her with no elements of control involved. This challenges the usual helper-recipient posi-tions, possibly engendering trust and willingness to receive help from the interpreter.
In addition, refraining from developing strict definitions has allowed the service to be flexible and the approach to be adjusted case by case. In this way, the cultural inter-preter has been able to take each family’s unique life situation into consideration. In a similar vein, Adams (2003, 47) considers that in its most genuine form empower-ment takes place in the context of non-professional, voluntary, low-threshold activity, for example in various peer support groups and citizens’ movements, rather than through bureaucratic systems or professional social work.
Regardless of our positive results, we need to address the limitations of our study.
The first limitation concerns the difficulty of measuring the empowerment process, since it can be influenced by numerous factors and events in a person’s life. In the interviews only questions related to cultural interpretation, were asked, so it is natural that the interviewees only talked about this topic.
The second limitation we recognized had to do with the limited scope of the study.
We could only draw on the experiences of one person working as a cultural inter-preter. The personality and working style of the worker are quite significant in terms of successful interaction and subjective experiences of encounters with the clients.
If several cultural interpreters had been available for observation, it is possible that the data and results would have shown more variation. Therefore, we believe that for a deeper understanding of the empowerment process in the context of cultural interpretation, longitudinal research with a more than one cultural interpreter would be necessary.
The third limitation that caught our attention when analyzing the data concerned pos-sible interviewer and response bias. The positive accounts of the cultural interpreta-tion given by all respondents, and especially the clients, may have been influenced by their perceptions of the researcher’s expectations, or by politeness towards the current cultural interpreter. It is difficult to suggest any simple solution to this prob-lem, but we feel that the reliability of the results is supported by the simultaneous observation of views from a number of different people. The results of our study are summarized in the following figure.
Figure 1: Empowering elements in cultural interpretation
Additional note
Eveliina Heino has worked as a researcher in the project Empowerment of Families with Children, and participated in developing a model of cultural interpreter practice.
She conducted the interviews and questionnaire surveys described in this chapter and performed the data analysis. Nadezda Kärmeniemi worked as cultural interpreter in the project and acted as co-author and commentator in the writing of this chapter.
Acknowledgements
We wish to thank Dr. Camilla Nordberg, Dr. Merja Anis and anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments on earlier versions of this chapter.
R
eferencesAdams, R. (2003) Social Work and Empowerment. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Alitolppa-Niitamo, A. (2005) Kotoutuminen ja lastenkasvatus. In Vahva vanhemmuus:
paras tuki nuoren kasvuun. Ed. Syrjälä, Jaana. Helsinki: Väestöliitto, 103-112.
Anis, M. (2008) Sosiaalityö ja maahanmuuttajat. Lastensuojelun ammattilaisten ja asiakkaiden vuorovaikutus ja tulkinnat. Helsinki: Väestöliitto.
Askheim, O. P. (2003) Empowerment as guidance for professional social work: An act of balancing on a slack rope. European Journal of Social Work 6 (3), 229-240.
Berg, K. (2008) Äitiys kulttuurisina odotuksina. Väestöliitto: Väestöntutkimuslaitoksen julkaisusarja D 48.
Björling, B. (2005) Empowerment – modeord eller framtida möjlighed. Kön, behan-dling och kunskap – om olika vägar ut ur missbruk och social marginalisering. Ed.
Mats, Hilte, 173-197.
Child Protection Act. [www-document]. [Cited 16.9.2012]. Available at: http://www.
finlex.fi/fi/laki/ajantasa/2007/20070417.
Doney, P. M., Cannon, J. P. & Mullen, M. R. (1998) Understanding the Influence of National Culture on the Development of Trust. The Academy of Management Review 23 (3), 601-620.
Dominelli, L. (2004) Social Work. Theory and Practice for a Changing Profession.
Cambridge: Polity Press.
Draguns, J. G. (1989) Dilemmas and Choices in Cross-Cultural Counseling: The Uni-versal versus the Culturally Distinctive. In Counseling Across Cultures. Ed. Pedersen, P. B., Draguns, J. G., Lonner, W. J, & Trimble Joseph E. Honolulu: University of Ha-waii Press, 3-21.
Forsander, A. (1994) Monietninen työ – maailma pienoiskoossa. In Monietninen työ:
haaste ammattitaidolle. Ed. Forsander, A., Ekholm, E. & Saleh, R. Helsinki: Helsingin yliopisto, 51-68.
Forsander, A. (1996) Asioimistulkin monet roolit. Tutkimus työntekijöiden asenteista asioimistulkkipalveluja kohtaan. Helsinki: Opetushallitus, Moniste 18.
Hammar-Suutari, S. (2009) Asiakkaana erilaisuus – kulttuurien välisen viranomais-toiminnan etnografia. Joensuun yliopisto. Karjalan tutkimuslaitoksen julkaisuja. N:o 147. Joensuu: Yliopistopaino.
Hannerz, U. (2003) Kulttuurin määritelmien yhteentörmäys. In Erilaisuus. Ed. Lehto-nen, M. & Löytty, O. Tampere: Vastapaino, 213-232.
Heikkilä-Daskalopoulos, S. (2008) Maahanmuuttajataustaiset lapset ja perheet pal-velujärjestelmässä – asiantuntijoiden näkökulmia. Lastensuojelun Keskusliitto.
Heino, T. (1999) Lastensuojelun trendit. In Verkostoituva asiakastyö. Ed. Virtanen, Päivi. Helsinki. Kirjayhtymä, 9-32.
Hirsjärvi, S., Remes, P. & Sajavaara, P. (2009) Tutki ja kirjoita. Hämeenlinna: Kariston Kirjapaino Oy.
Hirstiö-Snellman, P. & Mäkelä, M. (1998) Maahanmuuttajat sosiaali- ja terveyspalve-lujen asiakkaina. Sosiaali- ja terveysministeriön selvityksiä 12. Helsinki, Sosiaali- ja terveysministeriö.
Honkatukia, P. & Suurpää, L. (2008) Nuorten miesten monikulttuurinen elämänkulku ja rikollisuus. Oikeuspoliittinen laitos 232 / Nuorisotutkimusverkosto / Nuorisotutki-musseura 80.
Huttunen, L., Löytty, O. & Rastas, A (2005) Suomalainen monikulttuurisuus. In Suo-malainen vieraskirja. Kuinka käsitellä monikulttuurisuutta. Ed. Huttunen, L., Löytty, O.
& Rastas, A. Tampere: Vastapaino, 16-41.
Härkäpää, K & Peltola, U (2005) Maahanmuuttajien työllistymisen tukeminen ja kun-toutusluotsaus. Majakka-Beacon -hankkeen loppuraportti. Kuntoutussäätiön työse-losteita 29. Helsinki: Kuntoutussäätiö.
Ikäläinen, S., Martiskainen, T. & Törrönen, M. (2003) Mangopuun juurelta kuusen kat-veeseen. Asiakkaana maahanmuuttajaperhe. Vantaa: Lastensuojelun keskusliitto.
Ilmonen, K. (2005) Luottamuksen operationalisoinnista. In Sosiaalisen pääoman kentät. Ed. Jokivuori, P. Jyväskylä: Minerva, 45-68.
Ikäheimo, H (2003) Tunnustus, subjektiviteetti ja inhimillinen elämänmuoto. Tutki-muksia Hegelistä ja persoonien välisistä tunnustussuhteista. Jyväskylä: Jyväskylä University Printing House.
Juhila, K. (2002) Sosiaalityö marginaalissa. In Marginaalit ja sosiaalityö. Ed. Juhila, K., Forsberg, H & Roivanen, I. Jyväskylä: Jyväskylän yliopisto, 11-19.
Järvinen, R (2004) Ammatillisen maahanmuuttotyön kulttuuri: Erilaisuus sosiaali- ja terveydenhuollon jäsennyksissä. Tampereen yliopisto. Tampereen yliopistopaino Oy, Juvenes Print.
Kananoja, A., Lähteinen, M. & Marjamäki, P. (2007) Sosiaalityön käsikirja. Helsinki:
Tietosanoma.
Kankainen, T. (2007) Yhdistykset, instituutiot ja luottamus. Jyväskylä: Jyväskylän yli-opisto.
Katisko, M. (2012) Sosiaalityöntekijöiden näkemyksiä maahanmuuttajataustaisten perheiden asiakkuudesta lastensuojelussa. In Yhteiseloa metropolissa – kokemuksia sovittelusta ja näkökulmia lastensuojeluun. Ed. Ekholm, E & Katisko, M. Diakonia-ammattikorkeakoulu. Tampere: Juvenes Print Oy, 11-44.
Kemppainen, M. (2012) Havaintoja lapsikiistojen käsittelystä venäläisessä medi-assa. Lastensuojelun keskusliitto. [Cited 16.10.2012]. Available at: http://blogi.lskl.
fi/2012/04/25/havaintoja-lapsikiistojen-kasittelysta-venalaisessa-mediassa
Kemppinen, P & Rouvinen-Kemppinen, K. (1998) Tee jotain toisin – toiminnallinen elämänhallinta. Vantaa: Kustannusvalmennus P & K. Oy.
Latvala, E. & Vanhanen Nuutinen, L. (2001) Laadullisen hoitotieteellisen tutkimuksen perusprosessi: sisällönanalyysi. In Hoitotieteen tutkimusmetodiikka. Ed. Paunonen, Maritta & Vehviläinen-Julkunen, Katri. Juva: WSOY, 21-43.
Launonen, L. & Pulkkinen, L. (2004) Koulu kasvuympäristönä. Juva: PS-kustannus.
Lehto, J., Kananoja A., Kokko, S. & Taipale, V. (2003) Sosiaali- ja terveydenhuolto.
Helsinki: WSOY.
Lepola, O. & Villa, S. (2007) Syrjintä Suomessa 2006. Helsinki: Ihmisoikeusliitto.
Liebkind, K. (1994) Maahanmuuttajat ja kulttuurien kohtaaminen. In Maahanmuut-tajat, Kulttuurien kohtaaminen Suomessa. Ed. Liebkind, K. Helsinki: Hakapaino Oy, 21-49.
Lonka, K. (2001), Syntynyt johtajaksi? Uusia oppimisen mahdollisuuksia In Viisas valta. Johtamisen paradoksit. Ed. Castrén, P. Ekonomia-sarja. WSOY, 11-120.
Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H. & Schoorman, D. F. (1995) An integrative model of trust.
Academy of Management Review, 20, 709-734.
Melin, H. & Blom, J. (2002). Toisenlainen Venäjä. Yhteiskuntapolitiikka 67 (1), 595-599.
Mikkola, V. (2008) Lastensuojelu Euroopassa ja Venäjällä. Helsinki: Hakapaino.
Myllärniemi, A. (2007) Lastensuojelun perhetyö ammattikäytäntönä. Helsinki: Yliopis-topaino.
Mönkkönen, K. (2007) Vuorovaikutus. Dialoginen asiakastyö. Helsinki: Edita.
Mönkkönen, K. (2002) Dialogisuus kommunikaationa ja suhteena. Vastaamisen, val-lan, ja vastuun merkitys sosiaalialan asiakastyön vuorovaikutuksessa. Kuopion yli-opiston julkaisuja E. Yhteiskuntatieteet 94. Kuopio: Kuopion yliopisto.
Niiranen, V. (2002) Asiakkaan osallistuminen tukee kansalaisuutta sosiaalityössäkin.
In Marginaalit ja sosiaalityö. Ed. Juhila, K., Forsberg, H., Roivainen, I., Juhila, K. &
Roivainen, I. Jyväskylän yliopisto: Kopijyvä Oy, 63-80.
Payne, M. (2005) Modern social work theory. London: Palgrave MacMillan.
Peltola, U. & Metso, L. (2008) Maahanmuuttajien kuntoutumisen ja työllistymisen tukeminen Helsingissä. Kuntoutussäätiön tutkimuksia 79.
Pitkänen, P. & Kouki, S. (1999) Vieraiden kulttuureiden kohtaaminen viranomaistyös-sä. Helsinki: Edita.
Pitkänen, P. (2006) Etninen ja kulttuurinen monimuotoisuus viranomaistyössä. Hel-sinki: Edita.
Rappaport, J. (1987) Terms of Empowerment/Exemplars of Prevention: Toward a Theory for Community Psychology. American Journal of Community Psychology. 15 (2), 121-148.
Rappaport, J. (1984) Studies in empowerment: Introduction to the issue. Prevention in Human Services. 3, 1-7.
Reuter, A. & Jaakkola, M. (2005) Venäjänkielisten, vironkielisten ja kaksikielisten maahanmuuttajien sosiaaliset verkostot. In Maahanmuuttajien elämää Suomessa.
Ed. Paananen, S. Helsinki: Tilastokeskus, 23-38.
Riihinen, O. (1996) Elämänhallinta-käsitteen erittelyä ja ongelmia. In Elämänhallintaa etsimässä. Sosiaali- ja terveysturvan katsauksia. Ed. Raitasalo, J. Helsinki: Kansan-eläkelaitos, 16-34.
Rostila, I. (2001) Tavoitelähtöinen sosiaalityö. Voimavarakeskeisen ongelmanratkai-sun perusteet. Jyväskylä: Kopijyvä, Jyväskylän yliopisto.
Rotkirch, A. (2007) Venäläiset perheet murroksessa. In Venäläiset perheet ja sek-suaalisuus murroksessa. Ed. Korhonen, E. Väestöliiton julkaisuja. Helsinki: Priimus Paino Oy. 6-25.
Sailas, A., Susiluoto, I. & Valkonen, M. (1996) Venäjä- jättiläinen tuuliajolla. Helsinki:
Edita
Seligman, A. (1997) The Problem of Trust. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Seligman, A. (2001) Luottamus ja yleinen vaihto. In Sosiaalinen pääoma ja luotta-mus. Ed. Ilmonen, K. Jyväskylä: SoPhi, 39-54.
Siitonen, J. (1999) Voimaatumisteorian perusteiden hahmottelua. Oulu: Opettajan-koulutuslaitos, Oulun yliopisto.
Statistics Finland (2012)Tietokantatulukot: Kieli iän ja sukupuolen mukaan maakun-nittain vuodesta 1990 alkaen. [Cited 16.10.2012]. Available at: http://pxweb2.stat.fi/
database/StatFin/vrm/vaerak/vaerak_fi.asp
Stier, J. (2004) Intercultural competencies as a means to manage intercultural inter-actions in social work. Journal of Intercultural Communication. 7.
Tuomi, J. & Sarajärvi, A. (2009) Laadullinen tutkimus ja sisällönanalyysi. Helsinki:
Tammi.
Tuorila, H. (2009) Terveyspalvelut ja potilaiden voimaantuminen. In Kulutuksen liik-keet. Ed. Lammi, M,, Niva, M, & Varjonen, J. Kuluttajatutkimuskeskuksen vuosikirja.
Tampere: Yliopistopaino Oy, 102-118.
UN (1989) Convention on the Rights of the Child. UN General Assembly.
Vesterinen, S. (2008) Maahanmuuttajien näkemyksiä ja kokemuksia suomalaisesta lastensuojelusta. Haastatteluselvitys. Helsinki: Väestöliiton Kotipuu.
Vilén, M,, Leppämäki, P. & Ekström, L. (2002) Vuorovaikutuksellinen tukeminen sosi-aali- ja terveysalalla. Helsinki: WSOY.
Vuorio, J-P. (2001) Maahanmuuttajat ja monikulttuurisuus sosiaalipalveluissa. Hel-singin kaupungin sosiaalivirasto. Selvityksiä. Helsinki.
Värri, V-M. (2000) Maailma muuttuu, mutta kasvatusvastuu pysyy: auttamisvastuu kasvatussuhteiden perustana. The Finnish Journal of Education. 31 (2), 130-141.
Zimmerman, M. A. (1995) Psychological empowerment. Issues and illustrations.
American Journal of Community Psychology. 23 (5), 581-599.
Zimmerman, M. A. (1990) Taking aim on empowerment research: on the distinction between individual and psykological conseptions. American Journal of Community Psychology. 18 (1), 169-177.
cHapTEr ii
Marja Katisko