England and Wales Magistrates' Court (Family)

X Local Authority

Applicant

and

M

1st Respondent

and

I

(by her Children’s Guardian, Ms N)

2nd Respondent

Ms D

for the

Applicant

Mr T

for the

1st Respondent

Mr R

for the

2nd Respondent

These Facts and Reasons have been agreed by all parties save for the First and Second Respondents, who do not oppose nor consent to them, such Facts and Reasons being adopted by the Court and the Court is satisfied the proposed Orders are appropriate in the circumstances of the case.

Facts

1.

This case is listed today for the Issues Resolution Hearing in relation to X Local Authority’s applications for Care and Placement Orders in respect of I (DOB: ).

2.

I’s mother is M and her putative father is said to be D.  The parents have never been married and D is not named on I’s Birth Certificate and so he does not hold Parental Responsibility.

3.

The Local Authority are represented today by Ms D.  M is not present in court but her solicitor, Mr T, is in attendance.  I’s interests are represented by the Child’s Guardian, Ms N, and her solicitor, Mr R.

4.

It was previously indicated that the court would be requested to make final Orders at today’s hearing if it was felt appropriate to do so.

5.

We understand that M has failed to engage with the Local Authority and has not provided any instructions to her solicitor.  She has been informed in writing of the potential outcome of today’s hearing and has made no contact with her solicitor, the Local Authority or the court.  We therefore agree to consider the making of final Orders today.

6.

Mr T has confirmed that, without instructions, he is not in a position to either consent to or oppose the making of these Orders.  The Local Authority are asking that the court dispense with M’s consent in respect of the Placement Order.

7.

I was born whilst M was serving a custodial sentence for an offence of Burglary.  M has been involved with inappropriate adults and has a chaotic lifestyle, including the misuse of illicit drugs.  She also has no permanent place of abode.

8.

I’s half-sibling, T (DOB: ), was removed from M’s care on a permanent basis by Y Social Services due to her inability to care for T.  M was unaware of her pregnancy with T and when she went into labour she thought that she “just needed a fix” and refused to go into the ambulance.  M also stated that she had used four bags of heroin within the 24 hours prior to giving birth to T.

9.

M failed to engage with professionals in any meaningful way and continuously misled the professionals.  Due to the risk posed to T, it was not considered to be in T’s best interests to place her in her mother’s care and she was subsequently adopted.

10.

M’s lack of engagement has continued during these care proceedings in respect of I.  Having given birth to I whilst in custody, M then abandoned her upon her release.  She has continued to show a lack of commitment to care for I and has failed to maintain contact with her in any meaningful way.

11.

It is recorded that M has admitted that she is not in a position to care for I.

12.

D is I’s putative father, however, there is no DNA evidence to confirm this.  The Social Worker attempted to contact D to ascertain his wishes and feelings regarding I’s care but he has not responded to date.  M advised the Social Worker that D is aware of I’s existence but he has had no contact with her since her birth.

13.

We have read the bundle of evidence provided by the Local Authority for the purpose of today’s hearing.

14.

We adopt the Local Authority’s document dated 25 May 2010, entitled ‘Proposed Facts and Reasons relied upon by the Applicant to satisfy the Threshold Criteria’, as our findings of fact.

15.

We have read the report of the Guardian, Ms N, dated 8 September 2010 and note that she recommends that a Care Order and a Placement Order should be made.

Reasons

16.

As we are considering the making of a final Care Order, we must first consider the issue of whether an anonymised version of this judgment should be publicly recorded.  The parties’ legal representatives have raised no objections to such reporting and we make an Order that an anonymised version of our Facts and Reasons in these proceedings be published, following approval by all the parties.

17.

We have considered the No Order principle and are satisfied that it is better to make an Order than to make no Order at all.  Without an Order, in reality I would be homeless, as her mother has abandoned her and her current whereabouts not certain.

18.

On the evidence before us, we are satisfied that the threshold criteria under Section 31(2) Children Act 1989 are met and that I would be at risk of suffering significant harm if this Order were not made.  We consider that this harm is due to her mother’s unwillingness to provide the care that it would be reasonable to expect a parent to give.  This is evident from her actions in respect of both T and I.

19.

M has shown no maternal feelings towards I and has made her views clear by her lack of engagement.  She has been provided with opportunity to bond with I but has had no contact with her since June 2009.

20.

I’s welfare is our paramount consideration and she has a right to be brought up in an environment where she is loved and cared for and protected from any harm.

21.

We therefore make a final Care Order in respect of I (DOB: ) in favour of X Local Authority in order to enable the Local Authority to continue to safeguard I’s welfare.

22.

Having made this final Care Order, we have then considered the Local Authority’s second application, that being for a Placement Order.

23.

The Local Authority’s care plan is that I should be placed for adoption.  We have taken into account the principles outlined in Section 1 of the Adoption and Children Act 2002 and have considered I’s welfare throughout her life as our paramount consideration.

24.

We are satisfied that a Placement Order is in I’s best interests and therefore dispense with M’s consent pursuant to Section 52(1)(b) Adoption and Children Act 2002.

25.

In the circumstances, we grant a Placement Order in respect of I (DOB: ) in favour of X Local Authority, in order to allow them to pursue their plan of adoption.

26.

We have considered the welfare checklists in respect of both Orders and agree with the Guardian’s conclusions and recommendations.

27.

We have also considered the Human Rights Act 1989 and, although the making of Care and Placement Orders is an intervention into the life of the family, we believe that it is justified and proportionate in all of the circumstances.

28.

The permanent removal of any child from a parent is a draconian measure and we have fully considered the implications for all concerned.  However, these Orders are a necessary and proportionate response in order to meet I’s welfare needs.  Regrettably, we consider that no other Order or course of action would satisfactorily safeguard I and guarantee her a secure and settled future.