[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
	England and Wales County Court (Family)
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> England and Wales County Court (Family) >> L (Care Orders), Re [2014] EWCC B43 (Fam) (19 February 2014) URL: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCC/Fam/2014/B43.html Cite as: [2014] EWCC B43 (Fam)

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

IN THE MANCHESTER COUNTY COURT
IN THE MATTER OF THE CHILDREN ACT 1989
AND IN THE MATTER OF: L (CHILDREN)

		Civil Justice Centre 1 Bridge Street West Manchester M60 9DJ
		19th February 2014

1. THE JUDGE: I am concerned with three children:

D, a female child, born on 25^th May 1998 who is 15;

E, a female child born on 15^th March 2001 who is 12 and;

F, a male child born on 28^th May 2006 and he is 7.

2. The mother of the three children is B, their father is C.
3. The Local Authority's key social worker is K and the children's guardian, J.
4. This is an application for care orders in relation to all three children, dated 5^th November 2013.
5. The parents have steadfastly declined to involve themselves in the care proceedings. They have not instructed solicitors, they have not filed evidence and they have not yet attended court. I am satisfied that they have been informed of this hearing, that they know that they should be here and that they understand the implications of their absence. They have made a conscious decision not to attend.
6. These children have three older siblings: L, born in 1996; M in 1994 and; N in 1992
7. I am satisfied on the basis of everything I have read that the threshold criteria pursuant to section 31 of the Children Act 1989 is established. I am satisfied that each of the three children with whom I am concerned have suffered ill-treatment and neglect as a result of which their physical, intellectual, emotional, social and behavioural development has been impaired. Each of the children's physical and mental health has also been damaged and they have also each been harmed by seeing or hearing the ill-treatment of another; there have been repeated incidents of violence within the home involving the parents and the older siblings as well as these three children.
8. I find the underlying facts relevant to the s31 threshold criteria to be as follows:

(1) There is a long and distressing history of the parents' failure to meet the most basic needs of their children. The pattern of profound parental neglect dates back at least 13 years during which period the Local Authority has repeatedly been involved. It is depressing to record that the first referral to the Local Authority children services department in in relation to the neglectful and chaotic environment in which D, E M, and L were obliged to live. was in 2001

(2) The children have been exposed to or have suffered actual violence within the family home on regular occasions, the most serious known to the Local Authority being as follows:

(i) On 5^th August 2002 the mother assaulted the children;

(ii) On 29^th September 2002 the mother stabbed the father and threatened the children with a knife;

(iii) On 9^th December 2007 N smashed windows at the property;

(iv) In May 2013 N assaulted his mother;

(v) On 2^nd September 2013 E was assaulted by a neighbour, being subjected to punching;

(vi) On 26^th September 2013 D was assaulted by his mother.

(3) The parents have failed to ensure that the children's health needs are met and have failed to ensure they are taken to essential health appointments. Each of the children suffered painful dental decay. The mother also failed to take E to hospital to be medically examined following the assault I have already referred to on 2^nd September 2013 becse she was frightened that this would "incriminate her". Nonetheless she saw fit to seek medical attention for herself.

(4) The parents have failed to provide a safe and secure home for the children. The family home has been used to deal illicit drugs. On 26^th May 2009 N was found to have 19 wraps of heroin and 13 wraps of cocaine in his possession. He and his brother M both were sentenced to custody for possession of class A drugs and intent to supply those drugs from the family home.

(5) The parents have failed consistently to provide a clean and safe home for the children. Conditions have frequently been poor, hazardous and without adequate food and furniture.

(6) The mother and father, the parents, have failed to ensure that the children's personal hygiene is to an appropriate standard. The children have been subjected to flea bites, have smelt of urine, have been unclean, have been dressed in dirty and smelly clothing and suffer with head lice.

(7) The parents have failed to ensure that the children attend school regularly. D was not accessing any educational provision at all. The parents have not engaged in a plan devised to support D's return to education.

(8) The parents have failed to engage with the support services provided to assit them to meet any of the childrren's basic needs. Those services have included the Family Intervention Support Service, Home Start, the Antisocial Behaviour team, the Early Intervention Team, the Youth Offending service, CAMHS and child protection plans. They have failed to make any changes to their lifestyles which would be conducive to caring for the children.

9. The children were belatedly removed from their parents' care and accommodated by the Local Authority on 26^th September 2013. D did not wish to be placed with foster carers and went to live with P who is his cousin. I have read an assessment of P and I am satisfied that she is offering D a very good standard of care indeed. E and F have been placed together with foster carers where they have settled well and are making significant progress, depite the level of harm which both children but E, in particular, are striving to overcome.
10. Contact was arranged on two occasions each week. The parents have attended sporadically thereby causing distress to E and F. Contact has now been reduced to once a week. Even so, the parents have been unable to attend consistently. It appears that their tenancy has been abandoned and it is suspected that they may have moved to live in Blackpool.
11. It is the Local Authority's current plan that D be made the subject of a residence order to P and be provided with support and services by way of a supervision order. That is not a plan upon which P has had the opportunity to take any legal advice and is a plan which is causing her some legitimate anxiety, because she greatly values the support of the Local Authority, particularly in dealing with other members of D's family.
12. As I have indicated in discussions with the advocates, it is crucial that D's placement with P be maintained. There are few acceptable alternatives for him. In those circumstances I will adjourn the Local Authority's application in relation to D until 1^st April 2014. By that hearing, P will have had the opportunity of legal advice, K can organise some meetings within the family to set down boundaries as to P's position vis-à-vis D and the guardian will investigate further and provide a position statement.
13. In relation to E and F, in determining whch course best meets their future needs, their welfare individually and collectively is my paramount concern and I have reminded myself of the provisions of section 1(3) of the Children Act 1989, the welfare checklist. I have also reminded myself that any interference with E and F's right to respect for their family life, must be in accordance with the law, must be proportionate and must be justified by overriding concern for their welfare.
14. I am satisfied on the basis of everything that I have read that the Local Authority's plan for E and F is the best that can be achieved in the circumstances, namely that they remain in foster care throughout their minority. The Local Authority are committed to maintaining the current foster placement which has been so successful, but quite properly inform me that there is a residual doubt as to whether the current foster carers are prepared to offer a home to both children throughout their minority. Those are matters for the management of the Local Authority in the years ahead, with the involment of the independent reviewing officer and certainly do not preclude me from making a care order at this stage.
15. I am satisfied that the Local Authority's plans for contact to the parents to be reduced to six times per year during school holidays are consistent with the need for E and F to settle and put down roots in their foster home and it also reduces the scope for them being disappointed by their parents' failure to attend.
16. In all of those circumstances, I record that I approve the Local Authority's care plans and make care orders in relation to E and F.
17. I know that there will be a handover between J and the independent reviewing officer. I would like us to identify some of the issues which will need to be addressed during future reviews along with the docuemtns which the IRO will need to read, for recital in the order.
18. I will reserve any further applications to any of these children to myself. I will make the usual orders in relation to the costs so far as E and F are concerned.
[Discussions re order follow]