England and Wales Family Court Decisions (other Judges)

IN THE FAMILY COURT AT LEICESTER                                Case No. LK13C01454

HIS HONOUR JUDGE CLIFFORD BELLAMY

(Judgment given on 16^th May 2014)

Re: L (A Child: Rehabilitation to Care of Mother))

______________________

Solicitor for the Local Authority:                                                   MRS BETH HENDERSON

Solicitor for the Mother:                                                                        MR RICHARD GRAY

Solicitor for the Guardian:                                                                 MRS CLAIRE COUSINS

______________________

This judgment was delivered in private. The judge has given leave for it to be reported on the strict understanding that (irrespective of what is contained in the judgment) in any report no person other than the advocates or the solicitors instructing them and any other persons identified by name in the judgment itself may be identified by name or location and that in particular the anonymity of the child and the adult members of her family must be strictly preserved.

Transcribed from the Official Tape Recording by

Apple Transcription Limited

Suite 204, Kingfisher Business Centre, Burnley Road, Rawtenstall, Lancashire BB4 8ES

DX: 26258 Rawtenstall – Telephone: 0845 604 5642 – Fax: 01706 870838

JUDGE BELLAMY: 

1.                  Leicestershire County Council (‘the local authority’) applies for a care order in respect of a little girl, L. L is now aged 5 months.  She was born in December 2013.  Her mother is T.  Her father is believed to be J, though he has declined to undertake DNA testing. 

2.                  The mother is aged 17.  In May 2013 the Local Authority received a referral requesting a pre-birth assessment.  The mother had been known to children and young people’s services since March 2012 as a result of her volatile behaviour.  She was in the care of the Local Authority at the time she became pregnant.  There were concerns about the mother’s ability to ensure the safety and welfare of her unborn child. 

3.                  At birth, with the mother’s agreement, L was cared for by her maternal grandmother.  The mother was living with her cousin, WS.  L was cared for by maternal grandmother until late March 2014.  She was then placed in the full-time care of the mother and WS. 

4.                  L’s birth has led to a transformation in this mother.  With the very positive help and support of her social worker, Lynsey Mirfield, this mother has made great strides.  As a result, the Local Authority no longer seeks a care order but a supervision order. 

5.                  In her final statement the Local Authority social worker says this:

“On 28^th March 2014 L moved to live with WS and her mother.  WS has overall responsibility for L with the mother providing the care.  It is my professional belief that T still needs the support of a family member to support and guide her care of L, especially as L’s needs will change rapidly over the course of the next twelve months.  I would, therefore, recommend that following the ending of these proceedings the mother and L should continue to reside with WS for a further period of at least twelve months.  Given the mother’s remarkable progress, I very much hope that a contingency plan for L’s care would not be necessary.”

6.                  The Local Authority’s position is supported by the children’s guardian, Lynne Nelson. Mrs Nelson is a very experienced children’s guardian. In her final report, which has been filed this morning, she says this:

“T is a young mother who had a turbulent adolescence during which she became estranged from her mother.  At the point she became pregnant there were considerable concerns that she would not be able to manage her anger and that her lifestyle would impact on her ability to care for a baby.  Since L’s birth T has committed to doing everything she can to prove that she can parent her daughter.  T has been supported in this by her mother, mother’s partner and her cousin.  With all of the family members working together and T co-operating and succeeding in her contact and assessments, this has led to L initially being placed with her extended family and now being looked after by her mother.  While there is still some work for T to do in continuing to address anger management and learning to keep pace with L as she grows and develops, there are strong indications that T will continue to make progress and be able to care for L on her own in the long term.  L is thriving within her family.  She is a happy baby who has a good attachment to her mother and extended family members.  All parties are to be commended for their co‑operation and commitment to L which has ensured that she has remained with her family.”

7.                  The guardian supports the making of a supervision order.  The mother too accepts that there should be a supervision order for a period of twelve months.  Before the court is entitled to make any order at all it must first be satisfied that the threshold set by section 31(2) of the Children Act 1989 is satisfied.  In this case the mother accepts that that threshold is satisfied.  I agree that it is satisfied on the basis of the local authority’s threshold document.  I also agree that a twelve months supervision order is proportionate and in L’s best welfare interests. 

8.                  On 16^th January 2014 the President of the Family Division, Sir James Munby, issued guidance concerning the publication of judgments in the Family Court.  That has led to a significant number of judgments being published on the BAILII website, some of which have been picked up by the media including the local media (in the area for which I have responsibility, by the Leicester Mercury).  It is, in my opinion, important that the judgments published are not restricted to those handed down in cases of complexity or where there is some notable or unusual feature or where the court makes criticism of social workers or other professionals.  There are many other cases, of which this case is one, which are illustrative of high quality and sympathetic social work practice, of local authorities working in partnership with families to try to support them in caring for their children.  In my respectful opinion, cases in which there is evidence of good practice leading to positive outcomes for children and families are just as newsworthy as those which are more problematic. 

9.                  In this case I commend this mother for the great strides that she has made over the last few months.  I hope that progress will be maintained.  I am delighted to have seen L in court this morning.  I also commend this Local Authority and this social worker for the work they have undertaken with this family.  I propose to direct that a transcript be obtained at public expense.  Subject to any representations, I propose to send the judgment to BAILII.

[Judgment ends]