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 72 (FPC)
In the X Family Proceedings Court
Re L
Before:
Mrs E
Mrs P
Mr S
Legal Adviser: Mrs T
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Between:
|
X Local Authority |
Applicant |
|
and |
|
|
M |
1st Respondent |
|
and |
|
|
D |
2nd Respondent |
|
and |
|
|
L (by her Children’s Guardian, Mrs S) |
3rd Respondent |
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Mrs H-P |
for the |
Applicant |
Mr T |
for the |
1st Respondent |
Mrs B |
for the |
3rd Respondent |
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Hearing date: 20 September 2010
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Justices’ Facts and Reasons
|
These Facts and Reasons have been agreed by all parties save for the First and Second Respondents, who do not oppose nor consent to them, such Facts and Reasons being adopted by the Court and the Court is satisfied the proposed Orders are appropriate in the circumstances of the case. |
|
Facts |
1. |
This case is listed for final hearing today to determine X Local Authority’s applications for Care and Placement Orders in respect of L (DOB :). The Local Authority are asking that the court dispense with the consent of L’s parents to the making of a Placement Order. |
2. |
L’s mother is M (DOB: ) and her father is D (DOB: ). The parents have never been married, although they have cohabited with each other in the past. D is named on L’s Birth Certificate and shares Parental Responsibility with M. |
3. |
L has been the subject of an Interim Care Order since [] due to number of concerns of the Local Authority. There were concerns about serious domestic violence between the parents, as well as issues relating to alcohol misuse, poor home conditions, lack of co-operation with professionals and risky adults in M’s extended family. |
4. |
The Local Authority attempted to safeguard L’s welfare after M was seriously injured by D in an alcohol-fuelled confrontation that occurred in L’s presence. D is said to have stamped on M’s head and her injuries also included broken ribs. |
5. |
M has failed to prioritise L’s needs above her own and has put her at risk of both emotional and physical harm. Having been assaulted by D and having agreed to stay in a women’s refuge with L, she left that refuge with L and then allowed D to enter the home whilst L was in the premises. |
6. |
Although M had been involved throughout these proceedings, she has not engaged fully in the assessment process and assessments files have not been positive. M has not been open and honest with the Local Authority and has continued to associate with D. After stating that she was no longer in a relationship with him and had not seen him for six months, this was later discovered to be untrue. |
7. |
D has not seen L since July 2009 and has not been involved in the proceedings. He has spent a considerable period of time in custody, where he remains. |
8. |
The interests of L have been represented by her Child’s Guardian, Mrs S, and her solicitor, Mrs B. |
9. |
M is represented by her solicitor, Mr T. D is not legally represented within these proceedings. |
10. |
We have read the report of the Child’s Guardian, Mrs S, dated 19 September 2010. Mrs S recommends that a Care Order should be made and also agrees that a Placement Order should be made. |
11. |
We have had sight of the bundle of evidence provided by the Local Authority for today’s hearing and have noted the Proposed Basis for Threshold filed by the Local Authority dated 15 September 2010. We are satisfied that the threshold criteria are met in this case. |
12. |
We have read the following documents prepared by the Local Authority: the Final Care Plan dated 17 August 2010 which recommends adoption; the final statement of Ms K dated 27 August 2010; the Annex B Report dated 13 August 2010; the Statement of Facts dated 1 September 2010, which were prepared in support of the application for a Placement Order. |
13. |
Neither parent has filed a final statement. Whilst consent to the making of the Orders has not been given by M, she does not actively oppose the applications. D has taken no part in these proceedings and has not instructed a solicitor. |
14. |
We adopt the Statement of Facts prepared by the Local Authority as our findings of fact. |
|
Reasons |
15. |
As we are considering the making of a final Care Order, we must first consider the issue of whether an anonymised version of this judgment should be publicly recorded. The parties’ legal representatives have raised no objections to such reporting and we make an Order that an anonymised version of our Facts and Reasons in these proceedings be published, following approval by all the parties. |
16. |
L’s welfare is our paramount consideration. We have considered the No Order principle and are satisfied that it is better to make an Order than to make no Order at all. Without an Order, L would be returned to the care of her mother and father. |
17. |
On the evidence before us, we are satisfied that the threshold criteria under Section 31(2) Children Act 1989 are met and that L would be at risk of suffering significant harm if returned to the care of her parents. We consider that this harm is attributable to the care that M and D would provide to L not being that which it would be reasonable to expect a parent to give. This is evident from the history of the case and the assessments undertaken and is a view shared by the Guardian. |
18. |
It is clear that M has failed to act on the help and advice that she has been offered and, in doing so, has failed to show that she is able to protect L from harm. |
19. |
We therefore make a final Care Order in respect of L (DOB: ) in favour of X Local Authority in order to enable the Local Authority to continue to safeguard L’s welfare. |
20. |
Having made this final Care Order, we have then considered the Local Authority’s second application, that being for a Placement Order. |
21. |
The Local Authority’s care plan is that L should be placed for adoption. We have taken into account the principles outlined in Section 1 of the Adoption and Children Act 2002 and have considered L’s welfare throughout her life as our paramount consideration. We are satisfied that a Placement Order is in L’s best interests and therefore dispense with her parents’ consent pursuant to Section 52(1)(b) Adoption and Children Act 2002. |
22. |
In the circumstances, we grant a Placement Order in respect of L D (DOB: ) in favour of X Local Authority, in order to allow them to pursue their plan of adoption. |
23. |
We have considered the welfare checklist in respect of both Orders and agree with the Guardian’s conclusions and recommendations. |
24. |
We have also considered the Human Rights Act 1989 and, although the making of Care and Placement Orders is an intervention into the life of the family, we believe that it is justified and proportionate in all of the circumstances. |
25. |
The permanent removal of any child from a parent is a draconian measure and we have fully considered the implications for all concerned. However, these Orders are a necessary and proportionate response in order to meet L’s welfare needs. Regrettably, we consider that no other Order or course of action would satisfactorily safeguard L and guarantee her a secure and settled future. |