42-49 High Holborn London |
||
B e f o r e :
____________________
The London Borough of X |
(applicant) |
|
- and - |
||
SC |
(First Respondent father) |
|
SE |
(Second Respondent father) |
|
O and Y |
(Third and Fourth Respondents, by their children's Guardian Erika Endlein) |
|
Z Local Authority v SC and Ors (Placement with Drug Addict: Care Order at home) |
____________________
Emily Beer of Counsel appeared on behalf of the First Respondent
Kathryn Blair of Counsel appeared on behalf of the Second Respondent
Kelly Wilde, Solicitor, appeared on behalf of the Third and Fourth Respondents
____________________
Crown Copyright ©
Parties and application
Background
a. SC has used diazepam, amphetamine, cocaine, ketamine, MDMA, methamphetamines and consumed a chronic excessive level of alcohol and as a result the children have suffered and are at risk of suffering significant emotional harm and neglect in his care
b. The children have had to take on care tasks during SC's "bad days"
c. SC has been physically and emotionally unavailable to the children when using substances
d. SE also has a history of using amphetamine, methamphetamine, GHB and prescription drugs
e. The children have suffered emotional harm as a result of SE's inappropriate behaviour towards them specifically on one occasion trimming Y's pubic hair
f. Both fathers have caused the children significant emotional harm by exposing them to their volatile, acrimonious and toxic relationship.
Positions of the parties
Meeting the children
Assessments
This hearing
a. The social worker IL
b. SC
c. SE
d. The Guardian
The law
a. JW (Child at Home under Care Order) [2023] EWCA Civ 944 which emphasises that there must be "exceptional reasons" to make a care order at home. It should only be made where it is necessary for the protection of the child, and it will be "rare in the extreme" for the risks of significant harm to be high enough to merit the making of a care order while being capable of being managed at home. That case also reminds the court that the difference between removing children from home under a care order or under a supervision order is "largely procedural".
b. Re B (Care Proceedings [2013] UKSC 33 in which Hale LJ set out: "we are all frail human beings, with our fair share of unattractive character traits, which sometimes manifest themselves in bad behaviours which may be copied by our children. But the State does not and cannot take away the children of all the people who commit crimes, who abuse alcohol or drugs, who suffer from physical or mental illness or disabilities, or who espouse anti-social political or religious beliefs" [143]
c. T (Children: Risk Assessment) [2025] EWCA Civ 93 which reminds the court that risk must be identified, but must then be analysed in terms of likelihood, impact, management of risk and other welfare considerations. A helpful checklist is set out by Jackson LJ at paragraph 33, and he goes on to say that "it must be remembered that risk assessment is about realistic assessment of risk, not about elimination of all risks".
d. Re HW [2022] UKSC 17 which states that the aim must be to make the least interventionist order possible.
Issues
a. What are the risks to the children of remaining with SC?
b. Can those risks be managed?
c. What are the risks to the children of being removed into foster care?
d. Can those risks be managed?
e. Should the children have contact with SE and are orders necessary in that regard?
Welfare checklist
The ascertainable wishes and feelings of the child concerned (considered in the light of their age and understanding)
Their physical, emotional and educational needs
The likely effect on her of any change of circumstances
a. She said that at the moment the children had just completed therapy, were in a good place and were like normal children. Moving them to foster care would, in the Guardian's view, eliminate all this positive work
b. She was very concerned about the trauma of the removal itself. It might require police intervention which would be harmful.
c. She was concerned that the children would return home. They were innocent, and not "streetwise" and she was concerned about the risk to them of trying to come home by themselves.
d. She was concerned that they would not have a home to come home to. SC maintains the home by virtue of two mortgages which he is able to pay only because of the benefits he gets because the children live with him. It is said (and not challenged) that if the children were removed, the benefits would cease and the home would be lost. The Guardian was worried about the destabilising effect on the children if they lost their main care-giver, and also then lost their home at the same time.
e. She considered that removal to foster care would even worsen the relationship between the children and SE, because they knew that he supports the plan for removal and they might therefore blame him. In the Guardian's view if any such further deterioration in the relationship took place, there might not be a way back.
f. There would be an impact on the children's friendships as they would no longer be as near the school
g. Education would be disrupted, at a time when O is studying for his GCSEs.
Their age, sex, background, and any characteristics which the court considers relevant
Any harm which she has suffered or is at risk of suffering
a. SC having more awareness now of the harm his drug use has caused – the Guardian considered he was beginning to understand during the course of his oral evidence
b. A written agreement not to use substances when he is caring for the children
c. Increased monitoring
d. Regular and random drug testing, which SC does consent to
e. Consistent engagement with drug rehabilitation services
f. The very fact that the children are older and increasingly resilient.
43. In response, SC filed a statement dated 28 March 2025 "clarifying" the incident. He said "the individual who entered my flat is a vulnerable adult with schizophrenia who becomes unwell when unmedicated. He is known to the residents in the building and has previously entered other flats, including flats 2 and 4. The building's main door has been faulty for some time, which I have reported to […] the property managers. He entered without permission and left amicably but it took some time to gather his bags and belongings from the corridor before leaving. I reported the incident to police via 101, choosing not to call 999 to avoid the police attending in a panic and waking the children before school. I also informed [the Local Authority] later that morning, well in advance of the next scheduled Child Protection Review in July. This is evidence of my commitment to ensuring my children's safety".
How capable each of their parents are of meeting their needs
Realistic options
Decision
Form of order
Contact
SIO: Information
Message for the children
The other thing that was very clear to me was how much both your fathers love you. I know things are not good between SE and O at the moment, and maybe they are even a bit strained with Y. But he has written you letters telling you about his love and wish to be there for you and he told me about that too. He has taken a step back to give you space to be where you want to be. He did that out of love. It was hard for him. I hope that in due course you will feel able to see him, and that with help and support those relationships might begin to be repaired. That is very important for your emotional and mental health as you get older, and that is why I hope you will think about it carefully.
3 June 2025 Final Version.