England and Wales Magistrates' Court (Family)

X Local Authority

Applicant

and

Ms W  Mother

1^st Respondent

Mr K Father

2^nd Respondent

A a child through his Children’s Guardian

3^rd Respondent

Ms H

for the

  Applicant

Ms H of Counsel

for the

  Respondents

Ms G

For the

Child

1.

We are considering applications by the Local Authority for final care and placement orders in respect of the child A who was born in 2009.

2.

The current care proceedings were issued in October 2009 and a first interim care order was granted by this court in October 2009.

3.

The mother of the child is Ms W. she is not present at court today. Ms H of Counsel attends to represent her interests today.

4.

A’s father is Mr K. When proceedings were commenced the Local Authority believed that a Mr S was the father of A, however, it later became clear after DNA testing that he was not, and Mr K was the father. The parents are not married but do live together. Mr K has joint parental responsibility for A and is named on his birth certificate. He is not present today and Ms H of Counsel attends at court to represent him.

5.

The parents have not filed any evidence within these proceedings except for a position statement on behalf of Mr K dated 10.02.10 (p.22-24) and an undated position statement on behalf of Ms W (p.25-26.) We are advised that although they do not actively oppose this matter today, neither parent consents to the making of any order, and they would wish A to be returned to their care.

6

A’s interests are represented by Ms B, Children’s Guardian, who is present today with Ms G his Solicitor. The Guardian supports both Local Authority applications.

7

The history of the case is fully set out in the court bundle and documents from the previous proceedings concerning A’s siblings J, T and M. We do not intend to repeat the full details here, but confirm that we have read the Guardian’s reports, the Local Authority’s case summary, together with key documents from the previous proceedings before commencing the hearing today.

8

We note that there was a negative pre-birth assessment carried out by social workers Ms A and Ms L (C1-C14.)  Ms W and Mr K were also assessed by an independent social worker Ms S. who came to the conclusion that it would not be in A’s interests to be returned to the care of his parents. We find that both these assessments are thorough and comprehensive. We also note the assessments that were undertaken in the previous proceedings were also negative.

9

We have been told, and accept, that no other family members have come forward to be considered as long term carers for A.

10

We remind ourselves at the outset that the welfare of the child is our paramount consideration in determining the application for a care order, and that we should only make an order if it would be better than making no order at all. It is accepted by all the professionals that Mr K and Ms W love A.

11

In considering the application for a placement order our paramount consideration is A’s welfare throughout his life and again the “no order” principle applies.

12

In the absence of any party wishing to cross-examine any of the witnesses in the case, we are satisfied that it is not necessary for us to hear live evidence today. We have read the evidence in the case and heard submissions from all the representatives present in court.

13

Findings of fact:

In January 2010 the applicant Local Authority filed a schedule of findings sought (p.8-14.) Having considered the evidence before us we are satisfied that there is evidence to support those findings, and indeed we make those findings today.

14

We find that A is likely to suffer significant harm in the form of neglect, emotional and physical harm if left in the care of either or both of his parents, such harm being attributable to the care likely to be given to him if an order were not made, as that care would not be what it would be reasonable to expect a parent to give a child.

15

Welfare checklist:

The threshold criteria being met, we turn to consider the welfare checklist under the Children Act 1989 and the need for an order. We agree with the assessment of the welfare checklist factors made by the Children’s Guardian as set out in her report dated 28.04.10 and we adopt her assessment as our own. We believe that only a care order in this case will provide A with the necessary protection from significant harm.

16

We acknowledge that the making of a care order is a substantial interference in the private and family life of Ms W, Mr K and A. However, we are satisfied that the making of such an order today is a necessary and proportionate response to the risks which exist should A return to the care of either or both parents. Accordingly, we make a final care order in respect of A.

17

Having made a care order we now go on to consider the application for a placement order, being mindful that in this case such an order can only be made if we are satisfied that A’s welfare requires us to dispense with the consent of Ms W and Mr K, and that our paramount concern is as outlined at the start of our reasons.

18

In considering the welfare checklist of section 1(4) of the Adoption and Children Act 2002 we are grateful for the assistance of the Children’s Guardian and her most recent report dated 07.06.10. Again, we agree with and adopt as our own her assessment of the factors within that checklist.

19

We repeat again that our paramount consideration at this stage is A’s welfare throughout his life. A’s welfare at this time requires that he live in a safe, caring and stable long term family as soon as possible. In all the circumstances of this case, we believe that this can only be achieved by adoption outside of the natural family, a permanent adoptive placement best promoting and protecting his welfare. The permanency and security that this will provide to A outweigh any detrimental effect that there would be in him ceasing to be a member of his birth family.

20

Accordingly, we are satisfied that the welfare of A requires that the consent of Ms W and Mr K be dispensed with and we do dispense with their consents and make a placement order in respect of A.

21

Finally we deal with the issue of contact. We have been informed that both parents are attending at contact this morning, and have attended contact throughout these proceedings.

22

We endorse the proposal that direct contact will be reduced in order to promote a secure long term future for A. At court today the Local Authority have confirmed their plans in respect of indirect contact in that an annual letterbox contact will be offered to both parents. We endorse this plan.

23

Given the proposals for contact which have been outlined today, we do not believe that a formal order is necessary in respect of contact arrangements and we leave contact at the discretion of the Local Authority.

24

21^st June 2010