Children in foster families and those who have undergone custody transfer may experience a complex sense of belonging, including a lack of belonging. A lack of belonging can entail a risk for psychological distress, such as a sense of meaninglessness, feelings of stress, and a higher risk of suicide (Baumeister & Leary, 1995; Lloyd, 2018). This study aims to explore how children in foster care and those who have had their custody transferred negotiate their sense of family belonging, whether it is to their biological family or to the foster family. By highlighting the children's own experiences of family belonging, this study seeks to contribute to a deeper understanding of their emotional and social needs and provide insights that can improve social services for this group of children.

Background on Swedish Foster Care

Swedish social child welfare is based on a family-oriented perspective (Cederström, 1990; Lindén, 1998; Pösö & Hestbæk, 2014; Vinnerljung, 1997). Children’s right to care, security, and good upbringing should, according to this perspective, primarily be provided by the child's legal guardians, and social services should support and supplement them when necessary (1949:381, Chapter 6, Sect. 1; 2001:453, Chapter 5, Sect. 1). When needed, out-of-home care can be provided through temporary foster care, foster care, support housing for children with disabilities, or a residential care home (The National Board of Health and Welfare, 2022). The most common form of placement is in a foster family, encompassing more than 18,000 children (The National Board of Health and Welfare, 2022). Supervision of foster families is conducted by a foster care social worker, who is distinct from the child social worker responsible for overseeing the child's overall situation during foster care. The intention of Swedish legislation is that children placed in foster families should be reunited with their legal guardians when the purpose of the care has been fulfilled (1979/80:1, p. 501). Foster care should therefore primarily be considered temporary. Although foster care aims to provide a safe and stable environment for children who cannot remain in their own homes, the reality often tells a different story. The extent of instability within foster care is well-documented in previous research (i.e., Konijn et al., 2019; Skoog et al., 2015). Twenty-four percent of foster care placements end prematurely, and children who return to their legal guardians face an uncertain future. Within 2 years 25–40% of the children are replaced in foster care (Sallnäs et al., 2004). Repeated disruptions and relocations during childhood risk compromising the child's sense of belonging (Pösö, 2022). The lack of belonging can have far-reaching consequences. Even after reaching adulthood, young people often rely on parental support, which is a recognized protective factor (Biggart & Walther, 2016; Needham & Austin, 2010; Slaten & Baskin, 2014; Swartz, 2008). However, young adults with foster care experience often lack this crucial support, leading to negative outcomes such as early adultification, unstable living conditions, and complex emotional issues (Andersson, 2018; Bengtsson & Mølholt, 2018; Schofield et al., 2012).

To improve the opportunities for children in foster families to maintain a sense of family belonging, a legal amendment was made to the Swedish parental code in 1983 (1949:381, Chapter 6, Sect. 8). Custody transfer from the child's legal guardian to the foster family became possible. Over the years, numerous investigations have consistently shown that few custody transfers are carried out in practice, which has led to several amendments to the law (2000:77; 2001:453; 2002/03:53; 2021/22:178; The National Board of Health and Welfare, 2006).

Despite these efforts, the number of custody transfers remains low. In 2021, a total of 432 custody transfers were completed (The National Board of Health and Welfare, 2022). That same year, 7012 children had been with the same foster family for 3 years or longerFootnote 1—a group where custody transfers should be considered. The reason why custody transfers have not been carried out for these children are not known.

The family-oriented perspective, which the Swedish foster care system leans on, is supported by the European Convention on Human Rights, which states that everyone has the right to "family life" (1994:1219, Article 8; 2018:1197, Article 16). However, this can conflict with the child's rights to grow up in a family environment "characterized by happiness, love, and understanding" (2018:1197, in preamble). Conflict may arise when 'family' is defined solely by biology, neglecting children's potential broader understanding of family.

On January 1, 2020, the Convention on the Rights of the Child became Swedish law. However, a legal framework is not always a guarantee of consistent practice (Grinde, 2007). Prior research on belonging and foster care rarely focuses on children’s voices, with a call for more qualitative work exploring the stability and experiences of children in foster care (Costa et al., 2021; King et al., 2018). The potential effects of bionormativity on decision-making within foster care underscore the urgent need for research that incorporates children’s perspectives and utilizes innovative methods, such as visual tools (Niiranen et al., 2022; Törrönen et al., 2023). Therefore, an additional objective in this study was to examine the participating children’s narratives through both verbal and visual methodologies.

Literature Review

Earlier researchFootnote 2 shows that belonging within a family is cultivated through shared experiences and rituals (Bhanye, 2023), such as passing down a surname (Fresnoza-Flot, 2023; Pilcher et al., 2023), engaging in family traditions (Lanigan & Burleson, 2017), recounting history through photos (Barromi-Perlman, 2024), terminology used to refer to family members (Kaiser et al., 2024; Wulleman et al., 2023b, 2024), and contributing to household tasks (Zhang & Coene, 2024). A sense of belonging is reinforced by a stable environment, shared interests (Pietka-Nykaza, 2024) and mutual support within the group (Hayes et al., 2024). For children with experience of non-biological families, family is often perceived as an active choice linked to positive emotions (Costa et al., 2021; Ie et al., 2022). However, challenges for belonging arise when stability is lacking (Bryceson & Vuorela, 2020; Gopalan & Brady, 2020; Ngan et al., 2023; Pardede & Venhorst, 2024), the environment is unsupportive (Diomede et al., 2024) or relationships are uncertain (Allen et al., 2021; Hassall et al., 2021; Lanigan & Burleson, 2017; Levander, 2024).

Foster children express a desire to be involved in decisions affecting their sense of belonging, although they may not wish to make the final decisions (Hobbs et al., 2024). The support they receive from social workers is influenced by the social workers' own experiences of belonging (Michelson, 2024). Despite the importance of these factors, there is a notable lack of research on foster children's personal experiences of family belonging and how these experiences are recognized, or not, by social workers (Allen et al., 2021; Hayes et al., 2024; Wulleman et al., 2023b). This gap underscores the need for practical strategies to help professionals better understand and support these children's connections to their families (Allen et al., 2021; Levander, 2024).

Theoretical Framework

The theory of socially constructed families understands belonging as based on relational connections involving, e.g., emotional closeness, support, care, acceptance, and physical presence. The theory of ontological security underscores the fundamental human need to understand oneself and how to fit into the world (Giddens, 1991). Not fitting in, or having a place to belong to, a rootlessness, can create feelings of homesickness, disorientation, depression and desolation—or, with other words, “a sense of unbearable emptiness” (Casey, 1993, p. x).

The concept of belonging can be viewed from various perspectives. Family belonging is usually understood through a bionormative perspective, implying that biological family ties are the norm shaping perceptions of authenticity and continuity (Goldfarb, 2016; White et al., 2022). Bionormativity pervades reproductive technologies, culture, and legislation (Forrester, 2020; Howell & Melhuus, 2007; Johnson & Paul, 2016; Nordqvist, 2010; Patton-Imani, 2018; Schroeder, 2022). It risks marginalizing children in nonbiological families, with societal norms potentially reinforcing feelings of alienation (De Graeve, 2012; Wulleman et al., 2023a).

In this study, belonging is defined as having a given place in a given group where the individual feels at home and has a sense of respect and value, as well as shared experiences with others in the group (Goodenow & Grady, 1993; Mahar et al., 2013; Yuval-Davis, 2006). Central to the study are Mahar et al.’s five factors that shape the sense of belonging (2013). Subjectivity highlights the individual's perception of group membership, underscoring the qualitative aspect of interpersonal relationships. Groundedness emphasizes that the sense of belonging needs to be tied to a distinct group, which can vary depending on time and context. Reciprocity describes the mutual sharing of emotions, experiences, or understandings within a group. Dynamism focuses on external circumstances that can facilitate or hinder people’s sense of belonging, such as geographical boundaries, accessibility due to disabilities, prejudices, or the political climate. Self-determination refers to individuals’ power and ability to make decisions about belonging to a specific group, balancing with the feasibility of such belonging, influenced by factors such as legislation.

Reciprocity can be seen as emotional investments (Yuval-Davis, 2006) and qualitative aspects, such as love, care and support (Mason & Tipper, 2008). Witt (2005) further explored the concept of belonging in the theory of resemblances, investigating narratives that revolve around real or hypothetical physical and behavioral similarities within a group. Traditions further reinforce the feeling of belonging within families, creating a continuum that connects family members across generations (Gillis, 1997).

The ways we understand ourselves and our sense of belonging are shaped by the narratives we construct about ourselves (Yuval-Davis, 2006). These narratives encompass stories that highlight elements such as family rituals in daily life and holidays, which in themselves constitute the concept of a family, both internally within the family unit and externally through interactions with others (Finch, 2007, 2008; Morgan, 1996). Narratives can bridge the past and an envisioned future with the present. According to Mahar et al. (2013), sense of belonging must be examined through subjectivity. Hence, the focus of this study is the narratives of the children themselves. By acknowledging their narratives, the complexities of sense of belonging for children in foster care can be explored and understood. With such knowledge, social work practices aimed at children in foster care have increased possibilities for supporting children’s sense of belonging.

Method

Participants

The inclusion criteria for the study were children aged 11–17 who had been in foster care for more than 2 years. Children placed in kinship foster care were excluded from the study. Six children, four boys and two girls, participated. Two were in foster families, and four had experienced a transfer of custody. The children in foster families had on average been in the same foster family for 5 years. For those in families where custody was transferred, the average time in the same family was 8.5 years, and transfer of custody made after 7 years.

Recruitment

The children were recruited through three municipal foster care units located in southwestern Sweden. The recruitment of participants occurred in two stages. The first stage took place in Gothenburg, a large city with nearly 600,000 inhabitants, where the first author conducted informational meetings at six social service units. Recruitment materials, including text and film, were also distributed. This effort led to the recruitment of two children from Gothenburg. The limited number of participants was influenced by factors such as age, kinship care placement, and the constraints faced by social workers. It should be noted that the reliance on social workers for recruitment may have affected the selection process.

The second stage of recruitment occurred in Uddevalla, a smaller city with about 30,000 inhabitants, including rural areas. For children who had undergone custody transfers, recruitment involved sending informational materials to potential participants, resulting in responses from five guardians and four children.

The consent process involved a social worker providing legal guardians with written details and an informational film explaining the study. Legal guardians could query the researcher prior to providing consent. Consent was obtained from seven legal guardians. Children under 15 years of age with consent were informed about the study via an age-appropriate film for 11- to 14-year-olds. Children over the age of 14 were given both written information and an informational film tailored to the 15–17-year age group. The purpose of the films was twofold: to ensure that the information given to the children was age appropriate, clear, and uniform and to allow the children to form an impression of the researcher before the personal meeting. The first author contacted the foster family, allowing both children and adults to pose questions regarding the interview or the study. Moreover, a home visit was arranged for the child to meet the researcher before the interview, ensuring informed consent and finalizing practical details. During such a home visit, it was discovered that a child had not accessed the study's informational film and hence was not adequately informed. For this reason, the child chose not to participate in the study.

Interviews

Participants and Consent

All participating children and their legal guardians provided informed consent for the interviews to be filmed. The children's engagement in the process was encouraged by allowing them to verify the camera setup, which helped shift the observer-observed dynamic.

Pilot-Interviews

Pilot-interviews with two children from each of the study’s age groups were conducted. Based on the feedback, revisions were made to improve the flow, chronology, and clarity of the questions. The guide was also reviewed by a researcher with expertise in interviewing children, particularly those with vulnerable backgrounds. This review aimed to ensure that the guide fostered trust between the researcher and the child while avoiding any undue influence on the children's responses.

Interview Methodology

The interviews were conducted by the first author, who has 30 years of experience in child social work and no prior connection to the participants. The researcher explained the study’s aim—to enhance foster care from the child’s perspective—and clarified that their role was distinct from that of the child's social worker, reinforcing informed consent. All interviews were conducted on weekdays after school during the summer and autumn of 2022. They took place in a private space within each child's residence to ensure comfort and confidentiality. Each interview lasted between 20 and 45 min.

Interview Content and Techniques

The interviews featured open-ended questions across several areas, including: (1) the child's narrative of their family, everyday life, and celebrations such as holidays and birthdays; (2) the child's identification with their family or families; (3) the child's perception of a typical family and how their own family compares to other social groupings; (4) the child's family in relation to the surrounding context, including schoolmates and neighborhoods; and (5) the child's thoughts about their family in the future.

To enhance the child’s articulation of family belonging, the interviews incorporated both verbal and visual methods (Thomson, 2009). The visual method involved the use of approximately five centimeters high wooden figures painted to represent different genders, ages, outfits, hairstyles, and skin colors, along with a map featuring concentric circles. Children selected figures to represent themselves and their family members, placing them on the map to depict relational closeness.

Analysis

To enable analysis of both the verbal and visual material, the interviews were recorded using a film camera. The first author transcribed the verbal material verbatim, after the interviews, including gestures, tone of voice and tempo. The visual material was transcribed both in text and with visual clips. Both materials were arranged chronologically in two separate tables. Once the material was transcribed, the first author read and watched the transcripts numerous times, both overall and in detail. Words and codes in the verbal material that recurred were noted, to enable later thematization. The reading also focused on words and specific word choices and the extent to which words and expressions were repeated, both for each unique interview and throughout all interviews. When analyzing the visual material, which included both the transcribed descriptions of how each child chose and placed the figures, and images presenting the results of their choices, the focus was on two aspects. First, it was on what the child told, and second, on how the child told it, including tempo, clarity, hesitation, and changes made when the figures were chosen and placed on the map.

The analysis considered both how the narratives developed, and the identification of recurring themes within them. The first author performed the initial coding using narrative analysis (Riessman, 2008) and thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2006). The thematic analysis was then conducted collaboratively by all the authors. During this process, particular attention was given to identifying patterns and deviations between the verbal and visual materials, as well as differences between the narratives of children in foster care and those who had undergone custody transfers. Notably, all the children in the study contributed narratives related to each identified theme.

Results

The sense of belonging needs to be defined by the children themselves and tied to a distinct group, what Mahar et al. refer to as the concept of subjectivity and groundedness (2013). Hence, before discussing the themes, the children’s narratives about their family constellation will be presented. To simplify the subsequent reading, abbreviations will be used for child/children in foster families (FF/FFs) and child/children in families where custody has been transferred (CT/CTs).

Initially, in the interviews, both FFs and CTs verbally and visually narrated who was included in their family. All the children defined their family as consisting of mother, father, and siblings, either biological or non-biological. One FF also included a biological grandmother and aunt as part of the family. Three narratives of families emerged:

  1. 1.

    families as consisting solely of biological or non-biological families.

  2. 2.

    families as consisting of a mixture of biological and non-biological families.

  3. 3.

    families as non-biological, though including biological siblings.

Narrative one and two were displayed by children in FF families and narrative three were displayed by children in CT families. These narratives imply that FFs either do not live with the family to which they sense they belong, or they just live with them partially, for example, as a biological sibling, while CTs live entirely with their family. The average duration of 5.5 years that the FFs spent in their foster families highlights that the period during which they are not fully living with what they consider their family is considerable.

When both the visual and the verbal data are included in the analysis, a more comprehensive depiction of CTs emerges as it comes forth that they include more individuals in the definition of family, such as brothers-in-law and other non-biological relatives. One CT describes this while narrating about Christmas: “During Christmas, we try to include the whole family, yes, and Sofie and her husband, as well as his family. Yes, as you can understand, we become quite a large group.” This may indicate that CTs gain access to an extended network of family members through their non-biological family. However, despite the presence of non-biological relatives in the everyday lives of the children, they do not occur as part of the children’s family narrative in the visual data. This differs from the findings of some FFs, who may include biological relatives in their family narratives. It is also worth noting how ambivalent CTs talk about non-biological relatives. One CT seems to have difficulties finding the words: “It's like… um… Mom's… nah, what do you say? Grandma and grandpa.” The CT appears to be connected with non-biological relatives but is uncertain about the terminology used. This is noticeable among several of the CTs, while talking about non-biological family: “And then…it’s John too. It’s my mom’s sister’s son.“ “Mom’s sister’s son” could also be referred to as a cousin, but the child does not employ this term. In several narratives, the CTs define non-biological parents as their parents, yet they appear to be conscious of the fact that others might perceive relationships differently, necessitating further clarification. One child talks about the non-biological family: “It’s mom and dad’s childr…their real, biological children.”

The complex and multifaceted nature of the family concept becomes apparent and raises interest in how children narrate facilitators and obstacles to family belonging. The results may suggest that FFs face challenges in establishing a clear sense of belonging, especially in relation to family members outside the core of the family, navigating the borderland between their personal experiences and the norms of family belonging as defined by themselves, others, and society.

To Spend Time

This theme was formulated based on codes that concern the frequency of everyday activities and celebration of holidays. One factor which impact children's sense of belonging is the extent of time the child interacts with family members. In all cases, this seems to have significance for the sense of family belonging. The verbal and visual methods help deepen the stories. One FF displays the belonging to the biological family in the following manner (Fig. 1):

Fig. 1
figure 1

FF, biological family members

Full size image

The child simultaneously talks about how belonging relates to how often they see each other: “I don't meet my mom very often at all…so she has to be placed out here. But I meet her more often than my dad and grandma. I meet grandma more often than my dad.” The figure below shows how the child repositions the figures as a continuation of the verbal narrative (Fig. 2):

Fig. 2
figure 2

FF, biological family members in relation to time

Full size image

The story further develops when the child talks about how Christmas celebrations effect the belonging to the biological family:

“I meet my mom every other month. And I celebrate Christmas Eve with her. My grandma used to be there, but it was a long time ago. But before... She could come for like 10 min. Then she left presents for me and then she had to go. She had things to do. I don't remember where my dad lives.”

Another FF describes how time together affects the sense of belonging to different family members: “I sometimes meet my mom and sister, but I haven't talked to my dad in a while. I think the people I live with are the ones I'm closest to.” The verbal story is consistent with the child’s visual story (Fig. 3):

Fig. 3
figure 3

FF, non-biological and biological family members in relation to time

Full size image

Similar narratives of how spending time together shapes the perception of family belonging are found both in the verbal and the visual data among CTs. One CT defines family in relation to time spent: “I consider the people I live with to be my family.“ The child positions the figures in alignment with the story (Fig. 4):

Fig. 4
figure 4

CT, non-biological and biological family members in relation to time

Full size image

Mörgen and Rieker (2022) claim that belonging requires physical presence, which seems consistent with the findings in this study. The time spent together seems to affect the child’s perceived closeness to family members beyond biological ties.

To Share Experiences

This theme concerns rituals in everyday life and holidays. Scholars argue that family is created through shared experiences in everyday life and recurring rituals (Bell, 1992; Finch, 2007; Gillis, 1997; Morgan, 1996; Schofield, 2002) and that reciprocity promotes a sense of belonging (Mahar et al., 2013). The children’s narratives of shared experiences were elaborated upon in the interviews. FFs narrate verbally about everyday life and what family members do together. Their verbal narratives seemed interconnected with the visual narrative about family belonging. One FF narrates about everyday life with the non-biological mother: “I mostly spend time with Monica [foster mother]. We can just relax at home and watch movies. She also picks me up and drops me off at school.” The verbal story is reinforced by how the child positions the figures based on the share experiences (Fig. 5).

Fig. 5
figure 5

FF, non-biological and biological family members in relation to shared experiences

Full size image

In addition to everyday interactions, holidays such as Christmas and children’s birthdays also influence the sense of family belonging. One FF talks about birthday celebrations with the non-biological family: “Yeah, on my birthday. Then, I'm lying in my bed, and they come into my room and sing. It's Ann [foster mother] and my two older sisters. Then they've made a cake that we eat.” FFs’ birthdays are mainly celebrated in foster families, while Christmas tends to be celebrated with both the foster family and the biological family. One FF describes celebrating Christmas with the non-biological family and the biological mother: “At Christmas…we celebrate with all our family here at home. They all come to us. But I also celebrate another Christmas with my mom.” The child's verbal story marked by the words "we", "family", and "home" is consistent with the story in Fig. 3; i.e., where there is recurring interaction, there is also a sense of belonging. For CTs holidays and traditions also appear to be important for family belonging. The children’s visual narratives about their families correspond with their verbal narratives of who they celebrate holidays with. Christmas celebration generates clear and detailed stories from CTs and indicates that they have a clear place in the families. This becomes particularly clear and concrete in one CT’s narrative while talking about celebrations with the non-biological family: “We are very careful about the traditions of Christmas. We even have fixed places around the dining table. If someone sits a little wrong, you say, ‘Move over! I am sitting here. It's my place.’”.

CTs celebrate birthdays with those described as family. On several occasions, it emerges that also relatives celebrate the children on a contiguous weekend. One CT describes celebrations with the non-biological family this way: “Yes, we celebrate at home first. And then the rest of the family usually comes on the weekend…either before or after. Then, they celebrate me too.” In line with Somerville (1997), the familiarity that occurs with shared experiences emerges as a factor that is crucial for a sense of family belonging. However, none of the CTs included their biological families, even when visitations still occurred. The exception is when biological siblings reside within the same (non-biological) family. This may indicate additional factors that shape the sense of family belonging. These findings also point to another difference between FFs and CTs regarding where family interactions predominantly occur. FFs primarily engage with their biological family, either partially or entirely, predominantly in public settings. One FF talks about activities with biological family in this way:”Last time I saw mom, we were at the playland. And the time before that, we were at the amusement park. I think we're going to celebrate my birthday at the public swimming pool next time.” For CTs, most of the interactions with their non-biological families occur within the private sphere of their own homes, as one child describes it: “Typical things we do together are… yes, we can do crafts and stuff at home, have dinner, watch a movie and so on.”

Theorists suggest that interaction in public spaces may underscore visibility and social expectations (Finch, 2007), while private spaces can nurture intimacy and close relationships (Mahar et al., 2013; Mason & Tipper, 2008). A unique physical location is a crucial factor for a sense of belonging but requires an active process of doing home, or “homing” (Boccagni, 2022, p. 585; Casey, 1993). This may be a complicating aspect for the sense of family belonging when visitations between FFs and their biological family tend to occur in various public spaces. A tentative thought is that the sense of family belonging is reinforced when interactions with family members occur both in the public and private spheres. However, how the sphere of family interaction impacts participating children’s sense of family belonging can be challenging to assert due to the limited data and further research is needed.

To Be Seen, Cared For, and Supported

This theme was based on how different family relations were described. While analyzing the data, a deeper understanding of the contributions of shared experiences emerged. Social workers tend to view interactions and contact between FFs and their biological families as something that strengthens the child’s sense of family belonging (e.g., Andersson, 2018), which is in line with a bionormative perspective (White et al., 2022). From a bionormative perspective, it could be assumed that FFs may position biological parents closer than biological grandparents. However, one FF positions the figures representing parents and grandparents equally close (Fig. 6):

Fig. 6
figure 6

FF, biological father and biological grandmother in relation to be seen

Full size image

The FF’s narrative further deepens verbally when talking about the biological father, indicating possible conflicting experiences: “The last time I saw my dad, he didn't know what grade I was in. He thought I was in third grade. But then I just said, ‘I'm not in third grade.’” In line with theories of family practices, which argue that family is constituted through what we do in everyday life, it is plausible to assume that family practices can also reinforce disconnection (Morgan, 2019). One example is when an FF narrates verbally about the great-grandmother:”My great-grandmother sometimes sends me gifts. But she only sends things that are suitable for younger children. I usually give them to my sister's children instead.” The great-grandmother is not part of the FF’s visual narrative. Despite the limited data, the analysis of the verbal and visual narratives together can contribute to problematizing the established practices and assumptions within the foster care system. According to the theory of family practices (Morgan, 1996), constructing family is achieved through everyday actions. However, it is also plausible that families can be “undone”, that is, through actions that fail to reinforce a sense of family belonging. For instance, a lack of knowledge of a family member, as seen in the narratives above, could create a sense of detachment and non-belonging. This implies that merely increasing the frequency of contact with biological families does not inherently strengthen family bonds; instead, the quality of interactions is likely the crucial factor. This finding is consistent with the findings of other studies. In this way, how foster care is planned for and executed can affect how FFs experience a sense of belonging.

An additional pattern emerges exclusively in the narratives of CTs, where stories about family belonging and closeness are accompanied by a sense of knowing someone is always there for you. One CT talks about the non-biological mother: “I can talk about how I feel and how I’m doing and what I think. I can talk to mom about everything. Even what I think is difficult or just about regular stuff.” It can also mean providing support to the child in a more explicit way. One child expresses this while talking about the non-biological father: “So, dad…he has always stood up for me. And he helps me if I have trouble with the computer. I just call him, and he comes. I always know where he is, you know.” The CTs also distinguish family members based on the supposed quality of their relationship. One CT talks about the difference between the non-biological father and non-biological mother: “He doesn’t know much about girl stuff. That’s what I talk to mom about. But I can talk to dad too, but not in the same way. I’m close to mom.” The story is further confirmed visually when the CT positions the figures in the circles (Fig. 7):

Fig. 7
figure 7

CT, non-biological mother and non-biological father in relation to be seen

Full size image

Narratives about talking to each other about sensitive things, or standing up for each other, occur only among CTs. Previous studies have suggested that qualitative relational aspects among family members, such as feeling loved, cared for, and supported, can influence the sense of family belonging and hold the ability to transform a “house into a home” (Somerville, 1997, p. 234).

Being aware of the potential significance of the sense of family belonging linked to the qualitative aspect of the relationship can be crucial in practical social work, for example, when deciding and planning visitations between children and biological parents or when supervising foster families.

To Resemble Someone

This theme is based on how physical and social similarities were expressed. In all the interviews, resemblances emerge as a significant aspect of family belonging. Resemblance is a multifaceted concept since narratives about real or hypothetical physical and behavioral similarities can exclude individuals from a group. Resemblance does not, however, in itself create a sense of belonging (Mahar et al., 2013; Witt, 2005).

Among FFs, physical resemblance to biological parents and a sense of family belonging are recurring themes. When FFs narrate about physical resemblance, it also correlates with family belonging in the visual data. FFs describe their biological parents and biological siblings based on physical attributes that they are supposed to share, such as hair color, facial shape, or shoe size. Despite the richness of details in the FFs’ stories about physical attributes, they also expressed uncertainty about what their biological family members actually look like. FFs tend to highlight physical resemblance with biological relatives, but do not know exactly where the resemblance lies. An FF expresses the uncertainty in the following way: “I don't remember if I got my eye color from mom or dad. Mom has two different eye colors, but I don't know which ones. I don't know if my dad has dark or light hair, I think he has black.” Another FF talks about how others highlight physical resemblances with the biological mother: “Some say that I look like my mom in the face.” The verbal story of physical resemblance being significant to family belonging is reinforced by the child's visual story, for example, choosing family members with the same skin color to describe a typical family, even though the skin color of the figure representing the child differs from its own skin color.

Among FFs, there are no spontaneous stories about social resemblances to either biological guardians or foster families. One FF talks about the lack of resemblance to either the biological or non-biological family: “No, I don't have any. I don't have anyone I resemble in terms of behavior.” During the interview, however, the FF becomes aware of resemblances with the non-biological sibling previously not noticed:”I have never thought about whether I resemble my family in that way. But now that I think about it, I think I resemble my brother in the way we talk.”

Stories of physical resemblances between the child and the biological family also occur among CTs. One CT talks about physical resemblances with the biological father, highlighted by others: “Some say that I look like my biological father in the face. So apparently, I do.” The resemblances to biological parents are expressed as biological attributes, such as hair color, eyebrows, and teeth. However, the CTs’ narratives contained words such as "think", "probably", and "apparently", which may indicate uncertainty. Biological resemblances between the child and the biological family are noted by others, according to the narratives. It can be interpreted as bionormativity that family belonging presupposes biological ties (Nordqvist, 2010; White et al., 2022; Witt, 2005). However, in all verbal stories of CTs, social resemblances are highlighted with non-biological family: “I catch myself talking like my mom. We're alike in that way and that we're both equally childish. I definitely got that from my mom.” These social resemblances are exclusively related to the non-biological family. Social resemblances means that the children describe resemblances based on characteristics such as being childish, behaviors such as how one talks, interests such as motocrossing or riding, and opinions. Social resemblances can be observed by both the child and others. This may indicate that children’s perceptions and norms are shaped by their social context, contributing to their sense of belonging. The results suggest that contrary to the concept of bionormativity, children do not regard biological kinship as essential in defining a family.

To Know or Not to Know

This theme evolved through how certainty and hesitation were expressed verbally through the choices of words or tempo and visually through the handling and positioning of the figures. In the analysis, some intriguing differences among the participating children emerge, which may be associated with the varying legal contexts in which they found themselves. One is how the FFs narrate about their families. They negotiate and explore the positioning with their family members. One FF displays the difficulties in placing the figure symbolizing biological sister in another foster family (Fig. 8):

Fig. 8
figure 8

FF, biological sister in other foster family

Full size image

The relation to the sister is negotiated along with the verbal narrative: “I don't talk to my sister so much…I don't know where I will place her.”

The way FFs share their narratives deviates from that of CTs. As described previously, all CTs visually describe the non-biological family as their family, including biological siblings in the same non-biological family. The CTs talk about their family without hesitation. One CT expresses clearly that the non-biological family is considered family (visual story, see Fig. 4): “This is my family.”

While FFs’ and CTs’ negotiations concerning the positioning of family members may have multiple causes beyond the legal context, their narratives about the future are more explicit. Their statements emerge with a clarity that may be interpreted as indicative of a harsh reality. The stories of FFs are consistently characterized by words such as "don't know," "maybe," "probably," and can be interpreted as children not having a clear picture of what family belonging might look like in the future or lack self-determination, according to Mahar et al. (2013). This is also observed in the narratives of FFs. One child talks about how the power of belonging seems to lie somewhere else, with someone else, and the future belonging seems unsure:

“I don't know what my family will look like in the future. Maybe I'll meet my dad, but I don't know. They say that you have to move later, that you can't stay in the foster family. Anne [foster mother] has said that maybe she'll move when I'm not living here anymore. I don't know where she's going to move.”

Another FF expresses the uncertainty about belonging in the future in the following way: “When I'm an adult, maybe mom will be gone…or not. Leena [foster mother] might not be there either. I don't know what will happen to dad.”

In contrast, all CTs have clear stories about their current (non-biological) family in the future. One CT talks about how close relationships will persist over time: “This is my family. We have strong bonds with each other. They will always be my family.” The CTs further specify how they think the relationships will look in the future. There are also stories about family expansion as older (non-biological) siblings have children and partners: “I don't actually think it will be much different from now. We will continue to meet and do things together, have coffee, and such. We will celebrate Christmas together with all the children and grandchildren.”

Belonging seems to persist into the future for CTs, or what Peers called “knowledge of belonging” (2018, p. 358). This could be connected to the fact that custody was transferred so that CTs would know that they would stay and have a natural place in the family even after their legal age has been reached.

Two other aspects emerge in the verbal and visual narratives in one of the interviews with FFs. The biological family is exclusively described as the FFs’ families, despite living for many years in the same foster family, and biological family members are positioned close to the child's alter ego, despite the relatively low frequency of contact. In addition, the grandmother and father are placed at the same distance, despite the significant difference in how often the child meets them. This challenges the theory of family practices, in which family is seen as created through shared experiences in everyday life and recurring rituals (Finch, 2007; Morgan, 1996), and indicates that complex and contradictory factors influence the child's sense of family belonging. Mahar et al. highlighted several factors for creating a sense of belonging, one of which is dynamism and describes hindering and facilitating factors such as prejudice and the political climate (2013). Mason and Tipper (2008) argue that children with experiences of non-normative family constellations are influenced in their view of family and by family norms in the surrounding society, which are manifested, for example, through legislation (Howell & Marre, 2006; Witt, 2005). This seems relevant for some children in this study, and it is possible that this specific child provided a presentation that corresponds to the perceived family norm, that is, the biological family. This would come as no surprise since much of what is communicated through social work practice and legislation is framed by these norms and legislations, which exemplifies how political decisions impact family life and perceptions of belonging (King et al., 2018; May, 2011).

Discussion

This study explored narratives of family belonging among FFs and CTs, utilizing verbal and visual methods. The following themes that illuminate the sense of family belonging were identified: “To spend time”, “To share experiences”, “To be seen, cared for, and supported”, “To resemble someone”, and “To know and not to know”. These themes will be discussed in relation to implications for social work practices. But first, it is crucial to problematize causality. Children who experience family belonging within foster families are often selected for transfer of custody. Consequently, the sense of belonging to the non-biological family among the participating children who had experienced a transfer of custody may have existed before the transfer. Nevertheless, it is essential not to overlook that permanence (Somerville, 1997) and the possibility to “kin” (Howell, 2003) within families where custody has been transferred can influence children's sense of belonging within the family.

When viewed through the lens of family practices and belonging, the narratives underscore that the sense of family belonging is connected to shared time and experiences, as has previously been described by Bennett (2015) and Somerville (1997). The narratives, however, extend beyond these two themes. These findings complement Mahar's theory of belonging by highlighting relational and caregiving aspects such as being seen, cared for, and supported. However, further research concerning the relational and caregiving aspects that support a sense of belonging among FFs is needed. The narratives of the participating children suggested that a sense of family belonging can arise despite the absence of biological ties but can be challenged when the concept of family is not legally confirmed. This underscores the tension between the social constructivist and the bio-normative perspectives on family, a distinction that may not always be evident in the daily practice of social work. Future research could focus on developing strategies to support social workers in navigating this tension while supervising foster families.

This study supplements the existing related research by highlighting children’s perceptions of future family belonging and how these perceptions seem connected to the different legal contexts of their everyday family life. The possibility that FFs may experience an uncertain sense of future family belonging, leaving them with “a sense of unbearable emptiness” (Casey, 1993, p. x), raises intriguing questions about how the foster care system itself is executed. Additionally, the study shows that the use of both visual and verbal methods in conversations with FFs permits a deeper understanding of the narratives of family belonging.

Implications for Practice

The findings should be cautiously considered, given the small sample size of this study. Nonetheless, the results may provide a basis for reflecting the complexity of belonging and foster care.

In the narratives, there are signs of limited self-determination among FFs, identified as a critical factor influencing the sense of belonging (Mahar et al., 2013). This may be understood in relation to how the concept of family is confirmed or not confirmed in the legal framework. Even though the children in this study experienced extended stays in their foster families, the reasons for not carrying out custody transfers remained unclear but are consistent with previously reported statistics of low numbers of transfers of custody. This finding suggests that social work decision-making might not always reflect children's perceptions of family belonging or the intended principle of continuity. This highlights the necessity of reforming foster care interventions and emphasizes the importance of acknowledging children's voices, along with the complexities of their experiences in foster care, family life, and the act of narrating those experiences. Research also suggests that when children are less engaged in discussions, parental perspectives tend to take precedence over children in situations involving conflicting interests (Grinde, 2007). Including children in these discussions has the potential to improve the provision of appropriate care and protection (Heimer et al., 2018). Hence, engaging in conversations with children is important, and their perspective is valuable in understanding family belonging. FFs may however struggle to express complex issues independently and with their own words since they may experience ambivalent loyalties (Pösö, 2022; Schofield et al., 2012). Social workers need to acknowledge this complexity, be aware of their formal role, and consider taking responsibility for decision-making to ease the child's burden. Moreover, it is essential to examine how the fundamental trusting child–social worker relationship is impacted by everyday challenges in social work (Bell, 2002; Lorenz, 2005; Munro, 2001), such as staff turnover and time-consuming administrative tasks, and how children may adjust their opinion since they consider the caseload of the social worker (Pösö, 2022). The findings indicate that the visual and verbal methods used in this study enrich children's narratives since they are invited to explore and present their experiences from varying perspectives; thereby, the narrative unfolds in all its complexities. Therefore, the findings suggest that such techniques should be used in foster care arrangements since they could help children articulate their experiences, potentially navigating through ambivalent loyalties.

It is important to emphasize that everyday rituals and events, such as holidays and birthday celebrations, shape a child’s sense of belonging. The findings indicate that different celebrations are more explicitly connected to the concept of family, such as Christmas. When planning for visits, their symbolic significance for family belonging may be considered so that the sense of family and belonging can be supported or at the very least, not undermined. Given the children's varied understandings of family, it is also important to reflect on the language used in social work to ensure that it resonates with the child's perspective.

The narratives of the participating children suggest that time spent together is valuable, with sensitivity and openness in addressing difficult topics and emotions being especially highlighted. These insights could inform the selection criteria for foster families. It may also be beneficial to consider a foster family’s ability to handle uncertainties, as doing so is important for the emotional connection between the child and the foster family. It may also be crucial to evaluate foster families’ attitudes and capacities for long-term relationships, for instance, through custody transfers, with the child at an early stage, even for those children placed during their teenage years.

This study emphasizes the importance of acknowledging and highlighting resemblances in behavior, appearance, and interest for establishing a child's sense of belonging in a non-biological family. In this context, social workers play a pivotal role in guiding foster families to create an environment that encourages exploration and recognition of these resemblances, thereby reinforcing the child’s connection with its new family. Foster care social workers should also consider actively involving the relatives of foster families to enhance the child's identity and sense of belonging, especially as the findings show that children often feel uncertain about their relationships with these relatives.

The study also highlights the need for a comprehensive social work model that foregrounds the child's voice, blending legal, practical, emotional, and interpersonal elements to foster a sense of belonging and improve foster care outcomes.

Conclusion

This study provides in-depth insights into the narratives of family belonging among children in foster families and children who have experienced a transfer of custody, highlighting the multifaceted nature of belonging. By identifying key themes such as shared time and experiences, the need for support and being seen, to resemble someone and to know or not, the research emphasizes the complexity of fostering a sense of belonging. The findings contribute to ongoing research in social work by shedding light on how these elements can shape children's perceptions of family.

Importantly, the study demonstrates that while a sense of belonging can develop without biological ties, it may be challenged when the legal recognition of the family is unclear. This tension in the construction of family underscores the need for social workers to carefully navigate these complexities. The study shows the possibilities of integrating both verbal and visual methods in research and social work practices, as these approaches enrich the understanding of children's experiences and perspectives. Ultimately, this research calls for a more child-centered approach in foster care, where children's voices and experiences are prioritized, potentially enhancing the development of social work practices to better support children’s emotional and relational needs.

Limitations

The study included a small number of participants. Hence, the results should be viewed as an opportunity to gain a deeper understanding of how children may experience family belonging, rather than as generalizable findings. Since the recruitment of participants relied on social workers, this may also have influenced the selection. To ensure the anonymity of the participating children while still highlighting the results and bringing out the children's voices, example quotes have been used to present the themes (Eldh et al., 2020). These example quotes are based on the data but are not exact reproductions from a single child. This affects the transparency of the analysis. To compensate for this, all three authors were involved in all the analytic steps, except for the initial coding, and together, they reflected on the quotes and their accuracy. Moreover, the authors cross-referenced the presentation of the findings with the transcriptions to ensure that the transcribed data had not been distorted during the analysis. The first author works part-time as a specialist in children in foster care, bringing an insider perspective that has informed the understanding of family belonging. This perspective has been complemented by the other authors' expertise in clinical psychology and social work and research into these fields. To address potential biases, the authors have actively reflected on their roles, and different theoretical and methodological backgrounds, and provided each other feedback during the cooperative analytical process. This has brought a breadth of perspectives. In addition, the first author has presented the preliminary results on approximately fifteen occasions to both practitioners and researchers, enabling valuable feedback for the continued work. This not only strengthens the methodology but also significantly enhances its relevance for social work practice, ensuring that the findings can be effectively applied to real-world scenarios.