This decision is part of the Family Courts Information Pilot - please tell us how useful you found the information by participating in this brief survey.
The written reasons are being distributed on the strict understanding that in any report, no person may be identified by name or location (Other than a person identified by name in the reasons themselves) and that in particular the anonymity of the children and the adult members of their family must be strictly preserved
Neutral Citation Number: [2010] EWMC 16 (FPC)
In the Magistrates’ Court
Family Proceedings Court
Before:
The District Judge
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Between:
|
Applicant |
|
|
and |
|
|
1st Respondent |
|
|
S a child acting through her Children’s Guardian Mr R |
2nd Respondent |
|
|
|
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Mr A for the Applicant
Mr S for the 1st Respondent
Ms B for the child 2nd Respondent
Hearing date: 12-4-10
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Justices’ Reasons
|
|
1. |
This is an application by X Council (the Council) for a care order in respect of (S.) a child under the age of one years old. S’s mother is Ms S (the mother) who is present in court and legally represented by Mr S of counsel. The mother does not consent to the application before the court but equally does not actively oppose it having received legal advice. The identity of S’s father remains unknown following DNA tests on two possible putative fathers. S herself is represented through the Children's Guardian, Mr R, who supports the application.
|
2. |
The background to this case is very helpfully set out in a written opening statement prepared by Mr A on behalf of the Council. There is a long history of social services involvement with the mother in relation to her four previous children all of whom have been the subject of care proceedings. Three have already been adopted and R is the subject of a placement order and is awaiting adoption. A detailed account of social services involvement can be found at pages C3-7 of the bundle. Concerns centred around significant domestic violence between mother and her previous partners, her inability to recognise the detrimental effect of those relationships and minimising that violence, her chaotic lifestyle, her inability to prioritise the needs of the children above her own needs and an inability to consistently work with professionals.
|
3. |
In relation to R, the final proceedings concluded in May 2009 when the court made care and placement orders. At the time of that hearing mother was already pregnant with S and plans were put in place for her to engage in a pre-birth assessment. Notwithstanding the history which I have already summarised, the pre-birth assessment was completed on the 13 August 2009 (C1-16) and recommended that mother have an opportunity to care for the child when it was born. However, this was a very finely balanced decision. During the completion of the pre-birth assessment mother had demonstrated to the assessors that she had accepted past mistakes and that the choices she had made previously had contributed to putting her children at risk. Mother emphasised that she was keen to use her past experiences to ensure that the needs of her child were always met and prioritised and assured the assessors that she was willing to engage with all professionals and agencies in order to ensure that she could have the care of her unborn child.
|
4. |
In view of the outcome of the pre-birth assessment a decision was taken by the Council to provide mother with an intensive package of support to maintain S. in her care upon birth with the added benefit of an interim supervision order. Accordingly, on 28 August 2009 S. was made subject to an interim supervision order and it was made very clear to the mother that in the event of S’s well-being and safety being compromised, the Council would return to court and seek alternative orders. However, by 27 October 2009 the Council's concerns had heightened. There were concerns about a deterioration in mother's lifestyle and behaviour including her level of cooperation with professionals seeking to monitor S's welfare such that it was considered by the Council at that stage to seek removal of S. from the care of her mother. However, on that occasion the Council was persuaded by the Children's Guardian not to remove S. but instead to draw up a new written agreement (D 49-50) with the mother detailing in explicit terms the expectations required of her and the consequences of her not doing so. On 27 October 2009 the interim supervision order was replaced with an interim care order although S. remained placed with her mother.
|
5. |
However, concerns persisted particularly around the mother's lifestyle choices. She was spending more and more time away from the home address and this affected S’s routines and the ability of professionals to monitor her care because appointments were missed. Mother was also felt to be aggressive and intimidating towards professionals. Consequently, on 21 December 2009 S. was removed from her mother's care and placed with foster carers pending the final hearing. Although the mother was offered contact to S. she has been inconsistent in attending.
|
6. |
The threshold criteria has been conceded by the mother and is set out in the schedule annexed to this judgment and signed by all parties. I approve the schedule and make findings of fact accordingly. Consequently, I am satisfied on the evidence before me that at the time protective action was taken S. was suffering and was likely to suffer significant harm in the form of neglect and emotional harm due to the care provided to her, and likely to be provided to her by her mother not being what it would be reasonable to expect a parent to give.
|
7. |
I must now consider what order, if any, to make and in doing so I remind myself of the welfare principles set out in section 1 Children Act 1989 and, in particular, that it is S's welfare which is my paramount consideration. The Council have filed a care plan at CP 8-15 of the bundle which indicates that should the court make a care order the Council intend to seek a placement order with a view to S. been placed with an adoptive family. On 12 March 2010 S. was approved by the adoption panel as being suitable for adoption and that decision has subsequently been ratified by the Council's agency decision maker. However, at the present time a placement application has not been issued as attempts are still ongoing to see whether S. can be placed in the same adoptive placement as R. Such a placement would have the approval of the mother and the Children's Guardian. I have been informed that the current social worker is hopeful that such a placement will be possible and the result of her enquiries should be known within the next seven days.
|
8. |
As I have already indicated, the mother does not actively oppose the application for a care order today. Such an application is also supported by the Children's Guardian. Despite the mother’s unfortunate history she has been given every opportunity to care for S. but has been unable to do so safely and consistently and allow professionals to properly monitor this care. Consequently, the Council had no alternative but to remove S. from her mother's care in December 2009. Since then, contact between the mother and S. has been inconsistent. More recently, the mother began working with Ms P at the NSPCC and a statement from Ms P can be found at B32-35 of the bundle. Ms P told the Children's Guardian that work with the mother was going very well and that mother has done everything asked of her. She has attended every session to date except one and has begun to deal with some very painful issues. Nevertheless, Ms P has witnessed the mother being hostile towards the current social worker and Ms P is concerned that mother has missed contact sessions with S. (B 34). It was also made clear to the mother that the intention of this work was not to halt the adoption process for S. but to assist the mother in the future. I commend the mother for engaging in this work and hope she will benefit from it.
|
9. |
I am therefore satisfied that the mother is not able to safely and consistently care for S. either now or in the foreseeable future and there are no other family members able to care for S. In view of S’s age and her need for stability and security in a safe environment. I therefore believe that the only order I can make is a care order to X Council which I now do. In doing so, I approve the care plan and following the delivery of this judgment I propose to give further directions in respect of the placement application.
|
10. |
With regard to contact, the mother currently has contact with S three times per week but upon the making of a care order this will be gradually reduced to once a month until an adoptive placement is found when there will be a goodbye contact. Once S. has been adopted it is proposed that there will be twice yearly letterbox contact between her and her mother in order to help meet S’s need for knowledge of her birth family. I approve these proposals but I would ask the Council to address the concern of the Children's Guardian about post adoptive contact between S and her half siblings.
|
11. |
THRESHOLD CRITERIA DOCUMENT |
12. |
In the matter of S: |
13. |
It is submitted on behalf of X Council that the threshold criteria document for the making of a care order under s31(2) of the Children Act 1989 is met, in that S has suffered significant harm, namely neglect and emotional abuse and is at risk of such harm if an order is not made as a result of the parenting given to her, not being reasonably expected of a parent to give. |
14. |
In particular: a. Ms S, mother has failed to prioritise the needs of S, due to her lifestyle, such that S was removed from her care on the 21-12-09. b. Ms S continues to lead a lifestyle which is inconsistent with the welfare of S. c. Ms S has failed to comply with the written agreement on any consistent level |
15. |
Accordingly by virtue of the above, S has suffered significant harm, namely neglect and emotional abuse and is at risk of such harm if she is returned to the care of her mother. |
16. |
Signed by : Ms S and counsel for mother Mr A for X Council Solicitor for the child |
17. |
12th April 2010 |
|
|