England and Wales Magistrates' Court (Family)

X Local Authority

Applicant

and

Ms R

1^st Respondent

M and K(two children through their Children’s Guardian)

2^nd and 3^rd Respondents

Ms W

for the

  Applicant

Ms B

for the

 1st Respondent

Ms H

for the

2^nd and 3^rd Respondents

1.

This is an application by X Council (the Council) for final care and placement orders in respect of two children M who is 10 years old and K who is 7 years old.  The mother of both children is Ms R (the mother) who is not present at court but I am satisfied knows of today’s hearing.  The mother is represented today by Ms B but she has not had any contact with her client for some considerable time and does not have up to-date instructions from her.  The father of both children is Mr K who died in 2009. The children themselves are represented through the Children’s Guardian, Ms C who supports the applications.

2.

On 13^th May 2010 I gave judgment in proceedings relating to both M and K as well as their half-siblings L and P. That judgment can be found at pages 28-31 of the bundle.  At that time I found the threshold criteria satisfied in respect of all four children and I made Special Guardianship Orders in respect of L and P in favour of Mr and Mrs N. However the care plans for M and K indicated that their names were to be placed before the Council’s Adoption Panel on the 9 July 2010 and I was therefore unable to conclude their cases at that time.  The final hearing for M and K was therefore adjourned until 28 July 2010 but unfortunately that hearing could not proceed as there had been a delay with the Adoption Panel meeting and the case was further adjourned until today.

3.

Both children were considered by the Leeds Adoption Panel on 13 August 2010 and were approved as being suitable for adoption.  Both children are clearly at the upper end of the age spectrum to be adopted but both the Social Worker and Children’s Guardian believe that they should at least be given this opportunity  The Council therefore propose to search for an adoptive placement over the next 6 – 9 months whilst concurrently looking for a long-term foster placement.  The outcome of these respective enquiries will clearly then influence the long-term plan for the children but in either event they will be placed together. 

However, it is recognised that the making of a Placement Order facilitates the search for an adoptive placement and it is on that basis that the court is asked to consider the placement applications today.

4.

I have been greatly assisted by a further report prepared by the Children’s Guardian who supports the applications before the court and the approach being adopted by the Council.  The Guardian’s report can be found at pages C184-192 of the bundle. 

5.

The Guardian has spent time speaking to both girls who are clearly of an age to express their wishes and feelings, particularly M.  Both girls know that they are not able to return to the care of their mother and that they will be found another family either through adoption or long-term fostering.  Both children have continued to reside in the same foster placement and are thriving there although understandably M is still very concerned about her birth family and whilst her heart tells her that she would like to return home she knows that she can not trust her mother to do what she says. K does not have the same level of understanding as her sister although she knows why she cannot return home and wants things to be different in the future.

6.

I am therefore satisfied as I was in May 2010 that neither M nor K can return to their mother’s care either now or in the foreseeable future and in the absence of any other family members able to care for them the only order I can make is a care order to X Council so that they can take steps to plan for the children’s future.

7.

With regard to future contact, there appears to have been some initial confusion between the Social Worker and Children’s Guardian as to what exactly is being proposed.  However, it has been clarified to me at court today that contact between both girls and their mother has already been reduced to three times per year and this will continue until such time as definite plans have been made for the children’s future care.  If an adoptive placement is found it is likely that direct contact will be terminated and the girls will simply have indirect contact through the letter-box scheme.  However, if the long-term plan is for fostering then direct contact will continue at the same level as now subject as always to the statutory review process which will be able to take account of both the mother’s commitment to contact and the children’s wishes and feelings.

8.

I am informed that both M and K have continued to see their half-siblings, L and P, in line with the arrangements made at the last hearing (C186 and page 30 of my Judgement).  The Guardian has confirmed to me that she is in full agreement with these proposals.

9.

I must now consider the placement applications for M and K. Both children require a permanent, stable and loving home where all their needs can be met throughout their childhoods and into adolescence. In my judgment this can best be achieved through adoption. As I have said, both children have already been considered by the Council’s Adoption Panel as suitable for adoption and if placement orders are made a search will begin to find an adoptive family. Both girls have benefited from the care they have received in their current placements but the sooner they can move to a permanent placement, the quicker they will be able to settle there.

10.

The mother does not consent to placement orders being made and I can only proceed to make such orders if I dispense with her consent which I am asked to do on the grounds that the welfare of both M and K requires that parental agreement be dispensed with. This, of course, mirrors the test which I must apply in considering the application generally, namely that the paramount consideration must be the welfare of M and K throughout their lives.

11.

For the reasons I have already given, and applying the welfare checklist set out in the Adoption and Children Act 2002, I am satisfied that the welfare of M and K dictates that placement orders should be made so as to safeguard their future care, and that for the same reasons the consent of the mother should be dispensed with.

12.

In arriving at this decision I am aware that neither child will be brought up in their birth family and will have only limited contact with their mother through the Council’s letter box scheme, but I am satisfied that these arrangements are the best that can be made in the circumstances and will help meet the needs of M and K for information about their biological family as they grow older.

13.

I therefore dispense with the consent of the mother and make placement orders in favour of X Council in respect of M and K. In doing, so I approve the care plans for each child.

14.

Heard before a District Judge on the 1 October 2010.