Abstract
In this paper we analyze five dominant policy frames adopted by governments in their responses to children during the COVID-19 pandemic–the institutional, developmental, pathological, normative family and rights-excluding frames. We argue that these frames serve to meet the interests of non-child stakeholders in politically expedient ways, rather than addressing the needs of children and their families. We provide some suggestions for alternative policy approaches that take into account the interests of children, including understanding the ambivalent implications of lockdown, taking into account the social ecologies of children, and a renewed focus on children’s rights, most importantly children’s participation rights.
Official URL
More Information
Divisions: | School of Humanities and Social Sciences |
---|---|
Identification Number: | https://doi.org/10.1080/19460171.2021.1930085 |
Status: | Published |
Refereed: | Yes |
Publisher: | Informa UK Limited |
Additional Information: | This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in Critical Policy Studies on 23rd May, 2021, available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/19460171.2021.1930085 |
Uncontrolled Keywords: | 1605 Policy and Administration; 1606 Political Science; 1608 Sociology; 4407 Policy and administration; 4408 Political science; 4410 Sociology |
SWORD Depositor: | Symplectic |
Depositing User (symplectic) | Deposited by Redhead, Robin |
Date Deposited: | 21 Jul 2025 11:24 |
Last Modified: | 24 Jul 2025 06:07 |
Item Type: | Article |
Download
Note: this is the author's final manuscript and may differ from the published version which should be used for citation purposes.
| Preview
Export Citation
Explore Further
Read more research from the author(s):
-
T Fattore
ORCID: 0000-0003-2858-2228
-
R Redhead
ORCID: 0000-0002-9150-7098
-
N Turnbull
ORCID: 0000-0003-3496-8418