Annex Za-2.2: Fønix Assessment Document (2022) / Fønix评估报告（2022）

The child has received family treatment from Fønix since June 2021. After several months of family conversations, Fønix concludes that the case seems to be based on cultural misunderstanding. The child does not show symptoms of sexual trauma, and there is no indication of inappropriate sexual contact with the mother. The evaluation has been closed and reported as such in Feb 2022.

Official Translation Summary– Fønix Case Closure Decision (14 Feb 2022)

Source: Borgercenter Børn og Unge, Municipality of Copenhagen
Date: 14 February 2022
Reference: Case no. 3-6000058837
Issued by: Ida Rude
Administrative Decision: Termination of Fønix Intervention and Case Closure

To: Beizi Li and Qiang Lin

The Child and Youth Services of the Copenhagen Municipality (Valby, Vesterbro, Kgs. Enghave district) has decided that the child, Oscar, will no longer receive support through Fønix, according to §52(3)(3) of the Danish Social Services Act. We assess that the intervention is no longer appropriate as defined by §68(1).

Justification:

According to the Fønix follow-up meeting on 7 December 2021 and the final evaluation note dated 20 January 2022, the stated goals of the intervention — namely, to process Oscar’s alleged experiences of sexual abuse by his parents — cannot be achieved at the present time.
Fønix assesses that Oscar appears as an anxious and emotionally immature child, who uses an avoidant strategy when asked about his emotions during play and conversation.
Fønix concludes that they have not succeeded in helping Oscar or his parents develop a coherent understanding of what may have occurred.
Fønix further states that before Oscar can work through any possible experiences of sexual abuse, there is a need for targeted efforts focusing on his relational environment and how to better meet his developmental needs.
Fønix recommends that compensatory measures should be maintained and potentially intensified.

Parental Input and Child Consultation:

The parents were informed and agreed that termination of the Fønix intervention was acceptable.
Ms. Li expressed a willingness to learn how to meet Oscar’s emotional needs.
Due to the extensive process over the past six months, and in order to protect the child, Oscar was not directly consulted about the decision to close the case (per Social Services Act §48). His viewpoint was inferred from the descriptions provided by all involved professionals.

Conclusions:

Although the report does not contain a formal declaration of innocence, it clearly shows that:
• The institution found no grounds to continue the intervention;
• No credible or consistent testimony was established to support sexual abuse claims;
• The case was administratively closed without referral to police or judicial prosecution;
• Focus shifted from alleged abuse to general emotional support, which implicitly indicates the original allegations could not be substantiated.