Participatory and Pro-active: Real-time Rights-based Recordkeeping Governance for the Alternative Care of Children

Author Accepted Manuscript of Evans, J., Paterson, M., Castan, M., Purtell, J., & Ballin, M. (2024). Participatory and proactive: Real-time rights-based recordkeeping governance for the alternative care of children. Records Management Journal. https://doi.org/10.1108/RMJ-11-2023-0069

Abstract

Purpose

To make the case for real-time rights-based recordkeeping governance as a new foundation for the regulation and systemisation of multiple rights in recordkeeping for childhood out-of-home Care.

Design/methodology/approach

In this article we aim to make the case for real-time rights-based recordkeeping governance as a new foundation for the regulation and systemisation of multiple rights in recordkeeping for Alternative Care. We will investigate this concept using the Australian context as a critical case study. We will highlight some of the current limitations in the Australian Alternative Care context in the way recordkeeping rights are represented in existing regulatory frameworks and monitored in practice. We will argue for the need for systemic transformations in child protection and information legislation and regulatory systems to better represent and enact Alternative Care recordkeeping rights.

Findings

Our analysis of the legislative provisions for participation in Care recordkeeping and access to records of Care experiences against the Australian Charter of Lifelong Rights in Childhood Recordkeeping in Out-of-Home Care reveals a number of limitations. While the direct provision of rights to access records and the strengthening of principles of participation in some of the jurisdictions are welcome, it illustrates how the risk-oriented focus of the legislation on child protection investigations and substantiations encodes opaque recordkeeping practices and works against the provision of the full-suite of childhood recordkeeping rights envisaged by the Charter. Furthermore, without provisions for systemic and dynamic oversight we leave those with Care experiences to pursue individual outcomes against significant bureaucratic odds.

Research Implications

In line with international recognition that active participation and proactive provision of rights are a protective factor, we contend that governance frameworks need to be proactively designed to respect and enact recordkeeping rights, along with requiring mechanisms for real-time monitoring and oversight if the records problems of the past are not to be perpetuated.

Practical Implications

Our proposal for the need for a real-time, rights-based recordkeeping governance seeks to address the systemic recordkeeping problems that have been identified in research and public inquiry related to Alternative Care systems in Australia as well as in the UK.

Social Implications

Adopting a governance model that prioritises real-time, rights-based principles will ultimately impact how the Alternative Care system approaches records and their value in the processes of care.

Originality/value

Placing real-time rights-based governance at the foundation of a reimagining of the Alternative Care recordkeeping model offers the potential to create a system that places rights in recordkeeping and ethics of care at its core. This has highly transformative potential for the overall Alternative Care system and its relationship with children in out of home care.