Using child participation in the Danish Agency of Family Law as a case, this article explores the role of institutional tools in policy implementation. The empirical material consists of 125 child interview records, a group interview with 12 child social workers and comprehensive empirical material from 25 cases. The analysis utilizes an abductive approach, combined with Barad’s agential realism as its basic ontology, and Haraway’s a-modern model of analysis. Frontline worker practice is, therefore, analysed as being neither in compliance with nor in resistance to the policy but rather as navigating the often-complicated, ever-changing landscape of institutional practice. One of the main findings is that while the institutional tools were intended to enhance child participation and empower children’s perspectives, high degrees of compliance with these proved to counter the policy intentions. Further, the analysis demonstrates how this is particularly evident in relation to some children because, in combination with professional and institutional truisms pertaining to children (in conflictual divorces), in practice the tools installed norms for (in)competent and (un)trustworthy child behaviour. Consequently, the participation of some children is particularly restrained.