The case of a sexual exploited minor- Intervention of the General Direction of Social Services of Dolj county (Romania: Case discussion in Romanian)

You need to login in to ChildHub before you can join this discussion. If you don't yet have an account, please register.

Register and join Login and join

The case discussed:

The situation was brought to the attention of the General Direction of Social Services and Child Protection (DGASPC) of Dolj County on 04/07/2013 after a referral from the National Agency Against Trafficking in Persons -Regional Centre in Craiova about the situation of the child Madalina Iasmina (born 25/04/1999) with the suspicion that her mother sold her to some persons of Roma ethnicity who sexually exploited her in Romania.

The minor comes from a cohabiting relationship between B. Ioan and C. Floarea. From the stories of the child and her father's concubine, the mother left the family 2 weeks after Madalina was born, leaving her in the care of the father and paternal grandmother, B. Florica. Following the detailed evaluation report ( in May 2013) it was proposed to monitor the girl's situation and include her in a counseling program. 

At the beginning of 2014, she disappears from home.  On 11/06/2015 the Directorate for Investigating Organized Crime and Terorism- Territorial Service in Craiova identifies her and requires for the minor to be placed in a specialized center within DGASPC Dolj because she is an injured party in a judicial case from 2013. Thus, it was established an emergency placement measure to CPRU Craiova starting from 15/06/2015.


- MATALA MIRELA – Inspector in the Case Management for children Department within DGASPC Dolj

- TANASESCU CRISTINA - Inspector in the Counseling Center for the Abused, Neglected and Exploited Children wtihin DGASPC Dolj

During the case discussion, the intervention measures applied and all stages of the case will be presented in detail, subsequently leaving space for discussions on good practices and for any questions / suggestions from the participants.

When and how long?

Friday, 25th March 2016, at 12.00h (EET). Duration: max. 1.5h


Online at

To whom is addressed?

All interested persons, especially professionals working on similar cases from public institutions and NGOs, Romanian speaking. The maximum number of participants: 25.

How do you enrol?

Registration/ authentification on is required. Enrolment to the case discussion is done by clicking on the "Join this case discussion" button. Taking into consideration the limited number of participants, please secure a place in due time.   

How do you access the online discussion?

Access the link:

This discussion is the first in a series of five case discussions which will take place from March to July 2016 (one case per month).
Case discussions represent an unique opportunity to develop our knowledge and to optimize  practices in child protection, so as to attract support and to obtain validation. The ultimate aim being, of course, improving the work undertaken by all of us with children and families, which otherwise forms a valuable learning experience.

 For more information, please contact the national associate for Romania:

Raluca Icleanu






Date and time for case discussion: 
25 Mar 2016 - 12:00pm
Learning points: 
  • For good results with the minor victims, the cooperation of the parents with the social services is a must.
  • ANITP is referring cases of child trafficking to DGASPC, the collaboration between the 2 institutions in this type of cases being crucial. Some have specific partnership agreements to outline their tasks and how they cooperate. The multi-disciplinary team is meeting regularly to discuss specific cases. This is regulated within the national referral mechanism and it is considered to be a best practice.
  • A psychologist worked with the victim before the protection measure was set and  2 psychologists afterwards, coming from the 2 centers of DGASPC- For trafficked children and case management. A continuous counselling is needed, taking into account that a relation should be built on between the victim and possibly, just one psychologist.
  • The mother of the victim was not included in the counselling process as her domicile is in another county, therefore services can be provided to her only by the DGASPC from the county where she is domiciled. DGASPCs of different counties should be informed regularly on the cases they work on, if relatives are involved.
  •  If psychological counselling with the victim is not working, other positive types of therapies, through art, music should be looked for.
  • Psychological counselling has a great effect depending on the openness of the victim. It makes the process difficult if the victim is reluctant, difficult to cooperate with.
  • If the victim is not cooperating, a person from her circle of friends of family that can she relate to, can be consulted.
  • The impact of the services is strong only if the victims stays in the center for the entire duration of the counselling. There is the need for a continuous process in order for a change in attitude and perspectives to be seen
  • A vocational profile should be done on the victim to focus on the things that she would like to do in the future. The vocational advisor would play an important role in this.
You need to login in to ChildHub before you can join this discussion. If you don't yet have an account, please register.

Register and join Login and join

Suggest a case to discuss

This project is funded by: