Visits in 2016 51 The information that emerged during the visit suggested that the adolescents were not always given an opportunity to be present when their possessions were being searched. The management confirmed that adolescents should be given the opportunity to be present, but that it varied whether this was actually the case. There were cases where adolescents arrived at the institution’s shielding unit, accompanied by the police, in handcuffs, strips and a spit hood. Selecting coercive measures and transporting adolescents to the institution are the responsibility of the police. The Parliamentary Ombudsman underlines, nevertheless, that a dialogue between child welfare institutions and the police can contribute to decreasing the risk of use of force during vulnerable transitions. International rules and guidelines highlight the importance of adolescents being given information on admission about the place, the rules and their rights, and that they receive information in a manner they understand. A review of the log entries in BIRK showed that the documentation of admission to the institution there was of varying quality. The employees themselves stated that they would like to see more information about admission in the log entries. They wanted more information about how the admission had taken place and what type of information was given to the adolescent. The information brochure about the institution and its code of conduct appeared to be out of date and were used to a varying extent. There was no information for adolescents or their next of kin in any language other than Norwegian. It emerged that the adolescents were not invited to participate in meetings organised by the child welfare service and the application section of the child welfare department in Oslo. An adviser and psychologist from the institution attended these meetings. As emphasised by international standards, it is important that the views of adoles- Child welfare service's emergency institution for young people cents are taken into account throughout their case process. Children and adolescents have a right to be heard and take part, and the procedures for this must be child-friendly. This means enabling the adolescents to attend these meetings, if they wish to do so. The need for a more systematic approach to including the voice of the adolescents during these meetings was pointed out during the visit. The adolescents at the shielding unit could have visitors at the institution, but in some cases only with a staff member present in the room. This appears to be a limitation in the privacy of the adolescent. The institution noted that individual assessments were made and noted in the log. The institution also underlined that it has informed the County Governor that this type of limitation is not covered by the template for administrative decisions. The Ombudsman questions whether this practice is in line with international standards on children's right to privacy and the right to appeal. After the visit The visit report was published in March 2017, and the Parliamentary Ombudsman has asked to be informed about the follow-up of the report's recommendations in June 2017.