Intersection of Tradition and Need of Change in Romanian Child Protection System

The reconstruction of the child protection system in the post-communist period so as to meet professional standards while responding to the needs of children is an enormous task. In order to understand the features of the current stage of the development of the Romanian child protection system and to evaluate its trends towards change, Roth-Szamoskozi analysed data from scientific literature and collected statistics to document the evolution of the child-protection structure. Empirical data collection using qualitative methods (content analysis of documents and interviews with staff) were designed to reflect the degree to which child welfare laws correspond to internationally accepted regulations and to analyse the attitudes of those working in the field at different decision-making levels. An experiment with a group of 12 students showed that there have been basic changes in the legal framework of Romanian child welfare. Students could see that the required principles exist in the new Romanian child protection law, but also identified areas which are still inadequately represented. 61 staff members working in child welfare agencies (both state and non-governmental) were also interviewed, using a systematic, circular interview. Using the criteria of competence and the existence of specific social goals, professionalism in solving social problems and respect for social-work values, the 30 non-governmental organisations were divided into three categories. The first (7 organisations) are active in the area, know the law and are fairly professional, the second (5) are motivated in their work with specific problems, but with no great competence. The 18 organisations in the third group have no competence in the social field and in issues concerning children and do only charitable work. The state agencies are still dominated by routine, but there were many staff members who were developing reform and strategic roles and were actively directing the system towards change. Many staff members in both governmental and non-governmental organisations were directing the system towards a stress on intervention in the interests of the child in the context of its family. Roth-Szamoskozi found that staff members felt the need of a more accurate evaluation system which would enable them to show their results more clearly.

Marginal Man in Modern Russian Literature

This research was focused around the intersection of two discourses: that of marginality and that of ideology. Ponomarev analysed works by Alexander Zinoviev, Vladimir Maximov and Eduard Limonov - three writers representing different groups of Soviet dissidence - from the viewpoint of the concept, drawn from anthropological theory, of marginal man. Using a methodology he describes as ideological analysis, Ponomarev showed that the ideologies of both the writers and their characters are marginal, lying as they do between official Soviet and western democratic ideologies. He showed that the works and the 'creative behaviour' of the three writers did not change after 1991, when their ideas seemed victorious. Marginality is shown to be a permanent characteristic and is linked with the main ideas of the dissident movement in the USSR. On the basis of this marginality, Ponomarev identified some common traits in dissident ideas and drew up a model of dissident ideology. This general model of dissident ideology seems to be one of the special Russian variants of the marginal ideologies of intelligentsia and could be compared to the ideology of Rodon Raskolnikov, the central character in Dostoevsky's Crime and Punishment. The discourse of ideology in the USSR in the 1970s-1980s and in 1990s Russia thus appeared as a process in which the elements of the official Soviet ideology were gradually superseded by those of the dissident ideology linked with the ideology of the underground, the Russian version of the post-modern. Marginal ideologies won and became mainstream but did not lose their basic marginal traits. Ponomarev concludes that the gap between the 'state ideology' and the dissident ideology, taken together with the special Russian version of postmodernity has shaped the current literary process in Russia, making the figure of the marginal man into the main writer type.