Surveillance and Child Protection: De-mystifying the Trojan Horse


Really interesting paper by Lynne Wrennall.

Surveillance and Child Protection: De-mystifying the Trojan Horse

From the abstract:
The Trojan Horse theory of Child Protection, as this scholarship may broadly be termed, alleges the misuse of Child Protection powers for ulterior motives. Years of struggle against the Law and Order, Psychiatric and other discourses have won a raft of Civil and Human Rights protections. Bypassing these protections, Child Protection provides a rhetoric that disguises surveillance and disarms opposition, because a justifiable and apparently benign pretext has been found in the ostensible and entirely laudable, aim of protecting children. The paper collates widespread evidence of how the pretext of Child Protection has been used to extend surveillance and disarm populations.
This bit (among others) jumped out at me:

Double Trouble Multiples through Data Enabled Surveillance
Another significant emerging concern is the realization that the ‘data double’, the virtual self created by dataveillance, is open to greater manipulation than the flesh and blood referent. As Los (2006: 69-74) points out, dataveillance tends towards the totalitarian because it is de-individualising and de-socialising,
aiming at the negation of subjectivity and agency. The virtual self, emptied of real content, becomes a mirror for surveillance, filled with whatever conjectural information surveillance has placed there. This identity theft is far more profound than the theft of papers, this steals who I am. I cease to exist and in my
place is what is written about me by people who do not know me, who have created a false me to justify profiting from selling products and services to control the threat that I am supposed to pose. The data double can be made to evidence needs and threats that provide a rationale for the economic interests in
From the conclusion:
The Trojan Horse theory of Child Protection has been enunciated to explain how a discourse that espouses benevolent even emancipatory rhetoric, has been complicit in the enactment of social harm against children and their families while simultaneously furthering the economic, commercial and political interests in dataveillance. The theory explains how agendas that are not in the best interests of children are able to gain camouflage though the discourse of Child Protection,
managing opposition and disarming dissent.
GIRFEC summed up.


Hi Admin

( The link does not work )

I read this with interest, then scanned the date posted. 2 and 1/2 years old and still as relevant.
Thanks for sharing this.