SUMMARY
At end March 2020, 80,080 children were in Care and the number increases year on year. The number of child homicides involving parents has stayed relatively steady over the decades, yet this is what local authorities fear. Funding for family support is limited whilst funding for child protection is ever increasing.
Care Orders are made in the Family Court and the local authority must prove under the Children Act 1989 that the child ‘is suffering or is likely to suffer significant harm’. However, outcomes for children in Care remain poor, with high levels of moves in Care, out-of-area placements, mental health problems, unemployment/offending/homelessness on leaving care, and persistent levels of abuse hitting the headlines (eg. Oxford, Rochdale, Rotherham). Outcomes for parents who lose their children to Care are unknown.
THE INCIDENT: FIRST LOCKDOWN, MARCH 2020
On 16th December 2020 Ofsted wrote to the Justice Secretary requesting urgent action with regard to Rainsbrook Secure Training Centre for children. It had raised the alarm in March, when lockdown began. By December 2020, despite the Justice Secretary’s assurances, Ofsted found the same concerns remained, including:
“Five recently admitted children independently told inspectors that they had been locked into their bedrooms for up to 14-days and only allowed out each day for up to 30 minutes for fresh air.”
This is the tip of a long extant iceberg, in which State care does not meet the exacting standards required of parents under the Children Acts. Whilst Rainsbrook is a detention centre for children aged 12-18, some of whom will not have been convicted of any offence, many other children are held in State care following Care proceedings. For the civil Family Court to place a child in Care against the parent/s’ wishes, the Court must have ‘reasonable grounds’ to believe that the child has suffered or ‘is likely to suffer significant harm’ as a result of the care provided by parents falling below a reasonable standard.
However, despite the outcomes for children in Care including low educational outcomes, poor mental health, trafficking/child abuse, placement instability, and unemployment, substance abuse, homelessness and offending amongst care leavers, the State’s parenting isn’t easily challenged. Parents (and local authorities) can apply for a Care Order to be discharged, but parents must prove that there has been a significant change in their circumstances since it was granted. Taking a local authority to court for placing a child at risk of ‘significant harm’ has not been an option.
The Rainsbrook report and the treatment of children provides a stimulus to demand a legal and policy change:
CURRENTLY parents cannot usually apply for legal aid in seeking to discharge a Care Order until time has elapsed and the parents have made substantial improvements since the child was removed.
POLICY CHANGE: parents whose children are taken into Care shall be allowed legal aid to apply to the Court for discharge of the Care Order/writ of habeas corpus no matter the time lapse and regardless of their personal circumstances where it is held that the care provided by the State has caused, or is likely to cause ‘significant harm’.
CURRENTLY, local authorities lack sufficient funding for family support, yet poverty and social deprivation are the key drivers of children being taken into Care.
POLICY CHANGE: If the Care Order is discharged, the local authority shall support the family (not just the child) under s.17 of the Children Act, and may not reapply for a Care Order unless it has successfully prosecuted the parents/carers under Section 1(1) of the Children and Young Persons Act. ie. The State must prove that the parent/s committed a criminal offence, requiring a higher bar of proof than civil proceedings in the Family Court.
CURRENTLY, little is known about parents who lose their children but many no doubt turn to self medication/harm/homelessness.
POLICY CHANGE: The Court may award damages to the child and/or parents, to be held in trust in the case of the child.
KEY BENEFITS:
1) Local authorities will improve the care that they purchase for their ‘looked after’ children.
2) Local authorities will take a more considered view about risk.
3) Care providers will improve provision, eg, by professionalising the work force. Currently, the qualifications needed to work in, or even manage, children’s homes, are very low. DBS checks show only whether someone has been convicted. Those who would harm children find it all to easy to enter such currently low paid jobs.
4) Lower numbers in care means more funding available to properly fund kinship carers.
5) A switch of funding towards family support and away from child protection will benefit parents and children. It will reduce the number of children in care and improve outcomes for both, through stability within school and community, and professional family support.
986-11