[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
	England and Wales Family Court Decisions (other Judges)
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> England and Wales Family Court Decisions (other Judges) >> R (young parents) [2015] EWFC B92 (15 May 2015) URL: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWFC/OJ/2015/B92.html Cite as: [2015] EWFC B92

[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]

IN THE FAMILY COURT AT IPSWICH

		8 Arcade St Ipswich IP1 1EJ
		15th May 2015

JUDGE ROBERTS:

1. This is the hearing of the care proceedings regarding Ryan X (not his real name), a little boy of nine months old; a beautiful little boy, I have seen the pictures. S County Council bring the proceedings. They are represented by Ms. Rothwell. Ryan's mother, Miss X, is represented by Ms. Catton-Newell. Ryan's father, Mr Y, is represented by Mr. Aldous and Ryan is represented by Ms. Stockdale, who is instructed by his guardian Annette Garnham.
2. I have read a bundle of papers prepared for this hearing, which include social work statements and reports, statements from the parents, reports from the guardian and a parenting assessment from Dr. Thomas. I have heard evidence from the social worker, Miss Snell, from each parent and the guardian.
3. The threshold criteria for the making of an order under s.1 of the Children Act has been met and the parties have managed to agree a document, which I approve. The position of the parties is that the local authority ask that I approve their care plan and make a special guardianship order in favour of Mr. and Mrs. Z, who are cousins of Miss X. Miss X asked me to return Ryan to her care, under whatever order I see fit. She wishes to parent Ryan on her own but maintain a relationship with Mr Y. Mr Y supports the mother's case and suggests that I make an interim care order at this stage to allow rehabilitation to take place with Miss X. Both parents would wish to parent together by the end of the year. The guardian agrees with the plan of the local authority.
4. The background is important here. Both parents are 17 years old and have had difficult childhoods. Miss X was made the subject of a care order when she was 13 after a very poor experience of being parented. She has, as a result of her early years, suffered at times from mental health difficulties. Mr Y remains living with his mother but has experienced abuse as well and has had social work involvement at various times in his childhood.
5. Miss X and Ryan were placed straightaway after Ryan's birth in a mother and baby foster home in August 2014. This was not successful and Ryan has been accommodated and placed in foster care since 18th November and the subject of an interim care order since early December. The local authority applied for a care order at the time of the breakdown of the mother and baby foster placement.
6. The threshold criteria show that at the time these proceedings started the parents were not able to manage Ryan's care consistently, physical or emotionally. They were not able to take advice when it was offered or work with professionals. Their own relationship preoccupied them, which was abusive, and Ryan was exposed to Mr Y's unacceptable behaviour. The parents at that time could not see what they were doing wrong or why it needed to change for their son's sake.
7. The central issue for me to decide is whether, since the proceedings began, there have been sufficient changes in the parents to make it safe to reunite Ryan with his mother and, to a lesser extent, with his father. If I decide there is sufficient change I must consider what order, if any, is appropriate. If I find there is insufficient change and that it would not be safe for Ryan to return to his mother's care, I must consider the proposal to place Ryan with the Zs and then consider the nature of any order and matters of contact. I have to apply s.31 of the Children Act as far as the threshold criteria are concerned. I then have to consider s.1, Ryan's welfare being paramount, and his welfare includes all those aspects which are set out in the welfare checklist and to which I will return. I also have to consider the law as regards special guardianship orders if I go down that path. I have to consider the rights of each of Miss X, Mr Y and Ryan under the Human Rights Act, in particular their rights to a private and family life but if there is a conflict between any of those rights, it is Ryan's right as a child which must take precedence.
8. Turning to the witnesses and the evidence, I did not hear from the first social worker in the case who held the case until December. His work covered the pre-birth period and the assessment which took place when Miss X and Ryan were placed in the mother and baby home. The parents now accept the evidence of Mr. Blaney, as I do. It does seem that it was only when Ryan was removed that the seriousness of the situation began to be understood by his parents. The behaviour of both parents in Ryan's first months towards his care and towards each other and to those trying to help them was poor and it is difficult to find much positive to say about that period of time.
9. I am well aware of how very young these parents are and how they have not had the benefit of a happy, secure and nurturing family life, which would make it easier for them to be parents. I also understand that their own experiences have made it difficult for them to accept help. I say all this not because it is new, but because I want the parents to understand that I am not in the business of making them feel worse than they currently do or criticising them for no reason. I do understand why they have struggled as new parents and why things were so poor for Ryan in his early months, but I have to take all that into account in my decision-making.
10. Dr. Catherine Thomas, who is a consultant child and adolecescent psychiatrist, prepared a report just before these proceedings began at a time when Miss X and Ryan were living in the foster home. Dr. Thomas was well aware of Miss X' very deprived background and her sensitivity around professionals and I find that she approached her task appropriately. Miss X did not cooperate fully with Dr. Thomas. Dr. Thomas was therefore unable to use the assessment tools which he had planned to use. The introductory assessment meeting went quite well, but Miss X's attitude was very different a week later. However, I am satisfied that Dr. Thomas was able, using her skills and experience and knowledge, to advise the local authority and now the court.
11. Dr. Thomas reported that Miss X's inability to accept people into her life "who are able to offer a reparative, nurturing relationship to her" was important and she concludes that:

" . . . while she cannot accept any goodness or nurturing for herself, her son is potentially at risk of being deprived himself, given the concerns around their relationship."

Of the relationship between the parents she says:

"[Miss X's] only consistent relationship currently is with Mr Y her partner, with whom she shares a volatile, unpredictable relationship characterised by intermittent severe emotional abuse . . . while she remains so preoccupied with this relationship, she will struggle to 'hold Ryan in mind' and prioritise his needs above that of her relationship with Mr Y. Further, she does not appear to be concerned about the impact of exposure to the conflict on Ryan, nor his response to her emotional withdrawal from him when she is upset."

12. Dr. Thomas observed that Miss X was unable to provide a more intense connection with her son or to understand his internal world. She points out that Ryan's developing brain can be affected by these omissions in having his needs met and that his emotional and cognitive development may be adversely affected. Dr. Thomas had already observed that the lack of attunement and responsiveness on Miss X's part, resulting in Ryan attempting to protest, meant that he was at risk of becoming passive, which could affect his development. An example is the lack of verbal interaction, which could affect his speech development. Ms. Stockdale read out the relevant paragraph and I am not going to repeat it all now.
13. Dr. Thomas concluded that:

"Ryan is at risk of significant harm if he continues to live with his mother and she is unable to accept support and advice for her parenting of Ryan. The concerns around Miss X's inability to form a trusting relationship with those seeking to support her, along with concerns around her parenting of Ryan are now consistent. Further, Miss X appears to be becoming increasingly hostile to any support offered by her foster carers. Miss X and Mr Y's volatile relationship is at risk of distracting both his parents from the task of parenting him safely. While this continues to be the case, Ryan is potentially exposed to neglect and possibly emotional abuse by his mother and this has potential implications for his emotional and cognitive development."

14. Dr. Thomas's evidence is important and I accept it. I am aware that matters have progressed since the assessments in October, but Dr. Thomas's work still has relevance as she has analysed the difficulties at a profound level and what needs to happen for them to be changed significantly.
15. Miss Snell has been the social worker since December and she has prepared her evidence on the basis of what she knew of what had gone on before and of her own observations and assessment of developments since December. In her written and oral evidence Miss Snell was willing to give credit to the parents for the progress which they have made. She speaks of positive change in their parenting capacity, as demonstrated within contact sessions, but she says:

"Ultimately Miss X and Mr Y appear to be making progress, but in many respects have not achieved the progress that would be expected."

16. I will return to whether I agree or not in some detail. What is in no doubt in the social worker's mind and in mine is that the parents love Ryan very much and have shown great commitment throughout the proceedings.
17. Miss X found giving evidence very difficult as she said she did not know to most of the questions asked. She willingly accepted that she had not done things correctly when Ryan was born but feels that everything has now changed. She believes that she will continue to progress and that Ryan could soon be returned to her care. She hopes in some months that she and Mr Y could care for Ryan together.
18. Mr Y was a bit more forthcoming in his evidence. He sees the priority for Miss X and Ryan to be together and he accepts that his role is more as support. He wants to go on an anger management course but feels that he and Miss X have already taken all the concerns about their relationship and all their strategies are working. He does not see much to criticise, if anything, in Miss X's care of Ryan. Both parents rely heavily on the contact notes since April, which have been filed, which indeed show that during the twice-weekly sessions of contact of two hours each, contact is positive. There are descriptions of basic care, stimulation and interaction taking place by Miss X with Mr Y being very much in the background.
19. The guardian's report is the most up-to-date information, having been completed on 10th April and she has subsequently observed contact. She concludes that there have been changes but that they are insufficient for Ryan's needs. She points out that the parents still lack confidence in their ability to provide even basic care, that their relationship remains volatile, with an incident in January this year requiring the police to be called. But the parents both need so much help to enable them to change and develop and have not been able to engage with professionals consistently during the proceedings. The guardian recognises that the parents have begun to understand why domestic violence is dangerous for a baby and that Miss X has worked well with her and with her own social worker. Miss X has shown that she can keep a home clean and tidy, which was not the case in the foster placement. She is more responsive to Ryan than she was when Dr. Thomas assessed them and the guardian found that the parents have moderated their behaviour and are better able to regulate their emotions. However, she considers the relationship between the parents to be enmeshed. She says that Ryan is likely to have his emotional and physical needs neglected because there is insufficient change. She says that:

"[The parents] continue to lack insight into the concerns of the professionals and tend to minimise issues that have remained static. Ryan's parent's unmet needs; dysfunctional life choices; and inability to provide consistent care and emotional responses within a stable environment are of significant risk to his physical and emotional wellbeing. They have continued to make poor choices and lacked a sense of urgency in tackling their problems and seeking or engaging with external agencies to assist them. They have not engaged with services appropriately, or proactively."

She finds that:

"[Ryan] is likely to be exposed to [emotional] harm in the care of his parents due to; their limited ability to meet Ryan's basic needs consistently; potential for poor parental mental health to recur; and his parent's poor capacity to understand their child's needs or to meet his basic care needs, as documented within these proceedings."

She sets out the likely impact on Ryan if he was returned to his parents:

"He will experience adults as unpredictable, frightening and unable to meet his needs reliably. This will influence his functioning, resulting in difficulties in maintaining trusting relationships; affecting his ability to learn and achieve; and impacting on his healthy brain development. Ryan is likely to experience his needs as secondary to his parents and he will experience his world as an alarming place. The impact on Ryan is that he will experience inconsistent parenting that is likely to amount to significant harm when his parent's needs are pressing and his needs are secondary to their own."

20. The guardian considers that the balancing exercise between the risks of removal permanently and the risks of being with his parents is finely balanced because the parents have achieved recent changes. But, she concludes, and was firm in her oral evidence, that the changes are insufficient. She does not think that there are support services which could make the difference and make it safe for Ryan to be raised by his parents.
21. The social worker analysed in her final evidence four main areas of concern and I will now look at these and consider whether there is sufficient evidence of change.
22. Parenting capacity. On the positive side the parents, in particular Miss X, are better at stimulating Ryan and at dealing with the basics. They have shown this in contact. They can change nappies and feed Ryan and play with him and read with him. However, they lack confidence and Ryan picks this up, as a guardian recently observed last week. Both Miss Snell and the guardian consider that after caring for Ryan, albeit in recent months but having contact with him for his whole life, the parents should be able to do the basic tasks with ease but that is not the case. Of course, one has to bear in mind that the tasks that need to be done will change all the time. The parents do not keep to Ryan's routines; for example, they feed him or get him to sleep when he does not need either. The foster carer's routines are clear to them but they do not warm his bottle because that is not how Miss X used to feed him, the point being that is what he is now used to in his foster placement.
23. The parents, in particular the mother, have learnt to give Ryan emotional warmth and to stimulate him but still, at the time of the social worker's final evidence in early March, they were at times overstimulating him. Most importantly, the parents are still not in tune with his cues. They try various things to understand what he is trying to communicate, but this just frustrates him. The guardian observed last week that Ryan is not sufficiently comfortable with his parents, he picks up on their anxieties. He prefers to be held by other people. The foster carer reports that he returns from contact in an anxious state.
24. There have been big improvements but the guardian's observations were last week and she did not see a baby at ease with his parents. In contrast, on the same day she saw contact between Ryan and the proposed special guardian, Mrs. Z, and she found Ryan to be very different, happier and more relaxed, having eye contact.
25. It has been submitted that as the parents' abilities are improving, Ryan's confidence in them will grow and he will become more relaxed but I do not agree that I can find that. If the improvements in parenting capacity were so significant since the beginning of April, Ryan is likely to be showing in his behaviour and reactions that he has grown in confidence in his parents and that is not the case. I agree with the social worker and the guardian that there is a risk to Ryan from not having his emotional and developmental needs met and Dr. Thomas has set out those risks. I have already referred to them. I do not find that the improvements in parenting capacity are sufficient.
26. The social worker set out concerns about the home environment. I note that the guardian does not raise concerns from her recent visit. I am willing to accept that Miss X is making improvements, even though in early March there was still much work to done, but Miss X lacks good routines in her life, such as not getting up in the morning. I am willing to accept that she knows that that would have to change if Ryan was placed with her.
27. I have already indicated that I am particularly concerned about the relationship between the parents. There is a bad history of violence and aggression and arguments between the parents. At the same time, both are very dependent on each other. They do not have many other people, if any. The parents say that there has not been an incident since January and I accept that. However, that is only four months ago and that was a serious incident. During the incident Mr Y in anger smashed up some of Miss X's possessions. Neither have yet had professional help to deal with their relationship, although Mr Y told me he intends to get some anger management help. They spoke sensibly about how they are trying to deal with it themselves and I respect them for trying. However, after a history of serious violence and abuse between these very young parents, it would be most unwise, in my view, to introduce a baby into the relationship. Both parents hope to live together with Ryan during the course of this year, but I have no confidence that would be safe. I also have no confidence that Miss X would be able to end the relationship if Mr Y was abusive. She said she would, in her first statement, if there was any other incident, but shortly after that statement the January incident took place and she did not. I agree with the guardian that in her oral evidence she minimised what had happened.
28. Miss Snell refers to the parents' ability to work with professionals and there have been improvements here, again very recently, because the social worker did not find that the parents were easy to engage with. The guardian has found them a pleasure to work with. Other professionals have experienced limited engagement, for example the nurse to whom they have been referred. I accept that the parents are engaging much better at this time but, as the guardian and the social worker both say, the parents would need intensive support for a long time from a variety of professionals and, bearing in mind how things were for the first months of Ryan's life when Ryan was in Miss X's care, there is insufficient evidence for me to consider it more likely than not that the parents would continue to engage as required if Ryan was again in their care.
29. My conclusion is that there have not been sufficient changes over a long enough period for me to have confidence that Miss X, with or without Mr Y's support, could safely parent Ryan, despite the parents' very good and completely understandable intentions. I have to go on to consider whether, despite this conclusion, I should place Ryan with his mother or whether I should agree with the proposal of the local authority and the guardian that Ryan be placed with Mr. and Mrs. Z, his cousins. The Zs have not made an application for a special guardianship order but a thorough report has been prepared according to the regulations with a proposed support package. Considering first the tests in s.10 of the Children Act, Mrs. Z is a cousin of Miss X and the Zs have shown a commitment to caring for Ryan by taking up contact with him. Importantly, both parents agree that the Zs should be special guardians if they cannot care for Ryan and, of course, it is the plan of the local authority.
30. At the start of this hearing the parents were uncertain about a special guardianship order being made as opposed to a child arrangements order, but they have listened carefully to the evidence and agree that Ryan needs to have permanence and to feel like the other children in the Z family and I was very impressed by the parents' ability to see that point, which shows that they can prioritise Ryan's interests over their own. Mrs. Z wants to care for Ryan only if it is found that his parents cannot, but if she is to care for him with her husband she wants it to be under a special guardianship order so that Ryan and her other very young children are not disrupted in the future.
31. I turn to the welfare checklist. As I have said, it is Ryan's welfare which is the court's paramount consideration and this means in part that I must put aside feelings of sympathy which everybody in this room feels for these parents and focus on what is best for Ryan. Subsection (2) reminds me of the general principle that any delay in determining the question is likely to prejudice the welfare of the child. This is relevant to one of the issues being put before me. The parents say that on the basis of the progress made over the past two months I should not make a final decision today but should make interim orders and to direct a plan for rehabilitation of Ryan with his mother. I can only do this if I think it is likely to succeed and if I consider that such a plan fits in with Ryan's timescales and I shall return to this.
32. The welfare checklist starts with the ascertainable wishes and feelings of the child. Clearly he is so young it is impossible to ask him, but his wishes and feelings have been analysed by the social worker and the guardian by observation. The parents do not agree but I prefer the evidence of the professionals, who are trained to look deeply at the signs that babies show and to understand whether babies are developing attachment and whether their carers are able to be empathetic to them and to follow their cues.
33. For all the reasons Dr. Thomas has set out, no doubt, and because of the months of less than adequate handling by his parents, Ryan is not at ease with his parents and I am not convinced that this can change or that it can change fast enough to accommodate Ryan's needs. The development of Ryan's brain now requires attuned parenting. Ryan has reacted very well to the care offered in contact by Mrs. Z and I am more confident that he will feel content and relaxed and that he will develop as he should do in that home.
34. Ryan's physical, emotional and educational needs. He is only nine months old and over the next 17 years he must have all his needs met. He needs for his physical, emotional and educational needs to be identified and provided consistently and with him always at the centre of his caregiver's mind. The guardian said to me he needs permanence, to have a sense of belonging within an ordinary family environment. He needs to feel he can stay in his family without disruption.
35. The likely effect on him of any change in his circumstances. He needs to move from his excellent foster placement. It is very much in his interests for the next move to be his final move. There is a lot of research which shows what can happen to very young children who are moved too often. It has been put that we have another year during which rehabilitation can be tried. That is a possibility. But the professional evidence to me is that to place him under the age of 1 would give him the best chance to be a stable and happy person, secure in his family. I have to bear in mind that he did not have a good start and that he has already been moved once. It is very much in his interests, in my judgment, for him to be in his permanent placement as soon as possible. If rehabilitation was attempted and did not work, and I find that the likelihood is that it would not work, Ryan would have two moves and a period of great disruption and not good enough care.
36. His age, sex, background and particular characteristics. At nine months old he appears to be meeting all his milestones. Dr. Thomas identified that he was showing signs of developing into a passive baby before he was removed into foster care and that can have long-term ill-effects.
37. I have dealt with to a great extent the harm which he has suffered or is at risk of suffering. The threshold document sets out the harm and risk of harm which Ryan was exposed to in his early months. The risk if he was placed back with his parents is of physical harm if he was caught up in his parents' disputes, of emotional harm if his needs were not understood and met, and possibly neglect if his parents were unable to work with professionals and continue to develop their abilities. I agree with Ms. Rothwell, who said that if the parents do not see the risks they cannot protect against them. Having listened to the parents' evidence, I concluded that they have only a superficial understanding of many of the concerns which have been raised. I understood, when Miss X gave evidence, why the various professionals concluded that she took things literally and therefore could not adapt her parenting because that is how she understood questions put to her, very literally. Neither parent could see much that needed working on. Neither parent really understood that the history of their relationship was a likely indicator of the future. Based on the past, further incidents of a violent nature are, in my judgment, likely and I agree with Ms. Garnham that stressful times, like Ryan being inconsolable in the middle of the night from teething, are likely to be more than these parents can cope with.
38. I do not find that there is a risk of him suffering harm if he is placed with the Zs, other than losing the opportunity of being brought up by his parents, and this is a loss because his parents are two attractive young people who love him dearly. However, the plan which has been agreed is for there to be 12 sessions of contact a year with his parents and so their link and their relationships will be maintained.
39. How capable his parents are to meet his needs or any other person to meet his needs. It will now be clear that I do not consider that Ryan's parents are capable at this time in their lives of parenting to a good enough standard. I very much hope that they will continue to take up opportunities for help and support and in particular, as Miss X is still a child in care, I hope that the local authority will ensure that therapy is put in place for her. I very much do not want to be told in the future, if Miss X has another child, that she needs therapy but that none has been offered.
40. I do find that the Zs are able to offer Ryan good and loving care and that he would best be placed in that family, which is part of his family. The guardian thought that the best order would be a special guardianship order so that the special guardians could invest in their relationship with him and she pointed out that future litigation with the stress that brings can prevent such investment by the carers.
41. I do not consider that it would be right to adjourn this decision. Ryan needs to be settled as soon as possible and I do not see sufficient progress in the parents to plan for rehabilitation. The guardian thought that in three to four months it would be possible to tell whether the parents could do it or not, but she thought that there was not a likelihood that they could and I agree. It would not be right to go down that route with a further final hearing in, say, five months as it would deprive Ryan of important months and opportunities to be settled if rehabilitation did not work.
42. For all these reasons I make a special guardianship order to Mr. and Mrs. Z, approving the plan as it has developed during the hearing for contact. That is 12 times a year and if the parents are not together in the future, they will share the time each month on the same day, albeit having their contact separately.