This thesis explores how violence-exposed children access interventions from Swedish Child Welfare Services (CWS), and how team leaders support caseworkers in identifying and counteracting bias and disparities in assessments, particularly in relation to children’s gender and family origin. Drawing on a mixed methods design, the thesis integrates quantitative and qualitative data to examine both structural patterns and assessment processes.

The first study in the thesis investigates whether demographic characteristics influence how cases involving suspected violence are assessed and responded to. Findings suggest that girls, children with Nordic family origins and those assessed at high risk of harm are more likely to receive interventions, while boys from migrant backgrounds are less likely to receive interventions, especially when parental consent is considered. These disparities raise concerns about the equitable realization of children’s rights under the United Nations’ Convention on the Rights of the Child.

The second study focuses on the role of team leaders in supporting equitable assessments. It highlights how supervision can serve as a site for bias recognition and disruption, particularly regarding gender norms and assumptions about migrant families. Team leaders were found to foster reflective spaces and promote diversity-aware practices through collective sensemaking.

The three key concepts of intersectionality, bias and risk models, and supervisorial sensemaking frame the analysis. Together, they illuminate how societal, organizational and interpersonal mechanisms shape children’s access to support. The thesis concludes by proposing an approach for a rights-based and socially just child welfare practice, emphasizing knowledge of children’s rights, awareness of bias, intersectional understanding, collective reflection and diversity-sensitive communication with families.

This thesis explores how violence-exposed children access interventions from Swedish Child Welfare Services (CWS), and how team leaders support caseworkers in identifying and counteracting bias and disparities in assessments, particularly in relation to children’s gender and family origin. Integrating quantitative and qualitative data, the thesis explores both structural patterns and assessment processes. The first study investigates whether demographic characteristics influence how cases involving suspected violence are assessed and responded to. Findings suggest that girls, children with Nordic family origins and those assessed at high risk of harm are more likely to receive interventions than other children. The second study focuses on the role of team leaders in supporting equitable assessments, highlighting how supervision can serve as a site for challenging bias. Team leaders were found to foster reflective spaces and promote diversity-awareness through collective sensemaking. The concepts of intersectionality, bias and risk models, and supervisorial sensemaking frame the analysis, illuminating how societal, organizational and interpersonal mechanisms shape children’s access to support. The thesis concludes by proposing an approach for a rights-based child welfare practice.