Section
UDC
314.6DOI
https://doi.org/10.31429/26190567-25-4-110-123How to Cite
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2025 Филипова А.Г., Медведева Е.А.
Abstract
The article analyses the role of children in the decision-making processes within the family unit. The material was derived from data obtained during the organization of a network discussion on three Russian-language online forums: Vladmama.ru, Littleone.ru and Materinstvo.ru. The impetus for the discourse was the description by the researcher, who was operating under a pseudonym, of an invented scenario involving a child’s involvement in intra-family matters. A total of 304 messages were collected from 109 female users. The method selected for the analysis of the message texts was critical discourse analysis, as interpreted by G. The seven research tasks outlined by Gee assist in answering three pivotal research questions: How do parents interpret children’s involvement in family matters? What practices of inclusion do they employ? And, finally, how are parental interpretations of children’s participation situated within the context of a nationwide policy? In analyzing G’s interpretation, we employ discourse analysis, focusing in particular on the seven research tasks identified by G: meaning; activities (practices); identities (roles); relationships; politics (distribution of social goods); connections; and sign systems and knowledge. This approach is typified characterized by a form of democratic decision-making that is, in practice, authoritarian. This is evidenced by the manner in which it correlates with the ‘decorating’ and ‘manipulating’ rungs of Roger Hart’s ladder of participation. It is frequently the case that parents are unaware of this contradiction. Children’s participatory practices vary depending on the type of issues being addressed. A common method of classification is to divide issues into three categories: personal (relating to children), general (family-related) and adult issues. It can be concluded that the discourse of parents regarding children’s involvement in resolving familial issues reflects a broader, all-Russian discourse of protectionism and the dominance of the adult world in relation to childhood.
Keywords
References
Filipova, A. G., Abrosimova, E. E. & Bukhtiyarova, I. N. (2020). Uchastie detei v reshenii semeinykh voprosov: analiz materialov roditel’skikh forumov [Participation of Children in Solving Family Issues: Analysis of Materials from Parent Forums]. Sotsiologiya [Sociology], 3, 222–233.
Gee, J. P. (2011). How to Do Discourse Analysis: A Toolkit. New York: Routlege.
Gippenreiter, Yu. B. (2016). Obshchat’sya s rebenkom. Kak? [Communicate with a Child. How?]. M.: AST.
Hart, R. A. (1999). “Children’s Participation: From tokenism to citizenship”. Florence: UNICEF International Child Development Centre.
Helwig, C. & Kim, S. (1999, March/April). Children’s Evaluations of Decision-Making Procedures in Peer, Family, and School Contexts. Child Development, 70(2), 502–512.
Hill, M., Davis, J., Prout, A. & Tisdall, K. (2004). Moving the Participation Agenda Forward. Children and Society, 18(2), 77–96.
Il’in, V.V. (Ed.) (1993). Filosofiya vlasti [The Philosophy of Power]. M.: MGU.
Jenkins, R. L. (1978). The Influence of Children in Family Decision Making: Parents’ Perceptions. Advances in Consumer Research, 6, 413–419.
Kalabikhina, I. E. & Kuchmaeva, O.V. (2013). Monitoring uchastiya detei v prinyatii reshenii, zatragivayushchikh ikh interesy [Monitoring Children’’s Participation in Making Decisions Related to Their Interests]. Voprosy statistiki [Voprosy statistiki], 10, 29–35.
Kalabikhina, I. E. & Kuchmaeva, O. V. (2016). Problemy i perspektivy monitoringa uchastiya detei v realizatsii “Natsional’noi strategii deistvii v interesakh detei na 2012–2017 gg.” [Problems and Prospects of Monitoring the Participation of Children in the Implementation of the “National Strategy of Action for Children 2012–2017]. Zhurnal issledovanii sotsial’noi politiki [Journal of Social Policy Studies], 14(4), 507–520.
Mann, L. & Greenbaum, C.W. (1987). Cross-cultural Studies of Children’s Decision Rules. In C. Kagitcibasi (Ed.) Growth and Progress in Cross-cultural Psychology (pp. 130–137). Berwyn, PA: Swets North America.
Mitrofanova, S. Yu. (2016). (Raz)ocharovanie “uchastvuyushchei” perspektivoi sotsiologii detstva: uchastvuyushchii podkhod v issledovanii detstva i ego kriticheskoe osmyslenie [The Charm and Disappointment of the “Participatory” Prospective Sociology of Childhood: The Participatory Approach in the Studies of Childhood And Its Critical Evaluation]. Vestnik Nizhegorodskogo universiteta im. N. I. Lobachevskogo. Seriya: Sotsial’nye nauki [Vestnik of Lobachevsky State University of Nizhni Novgorod. Series: Social Sciences], 4(44), 167–177.
Mitrofanova, S. Yu. (2016). Realizatsiya printsipov uchastvuyushchego podkhoda v sovremennoi sotsiologii detstva [Implementation of The Principles of Participatory Approach in Modern Sociology of Childhood]. Vektor nauki Tol’yattinskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta [Science Vector of Togliatti State University], 2(36), 132–135.
Nucci, L.P. & Lee, J. (1993). Morality and Personal Autonomy. In G. C. Noam & T. Wren (Eds) The Moral Self: Building a Better Paradigm (pp. 123–148). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Odinokova, V. A. (2018). Ehtika sotsial’nykh issledovanii s uchastiem detei. In Detstvo XXI veka: sotsiogumanitarnyi tezaurus. Tematicheskii slovar’-spravochnik [21st Century Childhood: A Socio-Humanitarian Thesaurus. Thematic Reference Dictionary] (pp. 433–436). M.: ROS.
Rusakova, M. M. (2014). Obzor zakonodatel’stva i literatury po ehticheskim aspektam issledovanii blagopoluchiya i narushenii prav detei [Review of The Legislation and Literature on The Ethical Aspects of Researches Concerned With The Welfare of Children and The Violation of Children’s Rights]. Teoriya i praktika obshchestvennogo razvitiya [Theory and Practice of Social Development], 16, 53–58.
Satta, C. (2015). A Proper Place for a Proper Childhood? Children’s Spatiality in a Play Centre. In Children’s spatialities: Embodiment, Emotion and Agency (pp. 178–179). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Shier, H. (2001). Pathways to Participation: Openings, Opportunities and Obligations. Children and Society, 15(2), 107–117.
Sibley, A., Fitzpatrick, R., Davis, E., Sheehan, M. & Pollard A. (2017). The Family Context of Assent: Comparison of Child and Parent Perspectives on Familial Decision-Making. Children & Society, 32, 266–278.
Sinclair, R. (2004). Participation in Practice: Making it Meaningful, Effective and Sustainable. Children and Society/, 18(2), 106–118.
Skrypnikova, E. M. (2014). Rol’ vzroslogo v realizatsii uchastiya detei v prinyatii reshenii [The Role of an Adult in the Implementation of Children’s Participation in Decision-making]. Sibirskii pedagogicheskii zhurnal [Siberian Pedagogical Journal], 6, 50–53.
Smetana, J. G. (1989). Adolescents’ and Parents’ Reasoning about Actual Family Conflict. Child Development, 60, 1052–1067.
Spark, C., Porter, L. & de Kleyn, L. (2019). ‘We’re not Very Good at Soccer’: Gender, Space and Competence in a Victorian Primary School. Children’s Geographies, 17(2), 190–203.
Szybillo, G.J. & Sosanie, A. (1977). Family Decision Making: Husband, Wife, and Children. Advances in Consumer Research, 4, 46–49.
Thomas, N. (2007). A child’s Right to Participate: Implications for International Child Protection. International Journal of Children’s Rights, 15, 199–218.
Volkov, V. V., Kharkhordin, O. V. (2008). Teoriya praktik [Theory of Practic]. SPb.: Izd-vo Evropeiskogo universiteta v Sankt-Peterburge.