Sunday 23 March 2008

Letter from Kevin Brennan assistant Janet McNamara

Castle View House

P.O. Box 12

East Lane

Runcorn

Cheshire

WA7 2GJ

Tel: 0870 000 2288

info@dcsf.gsi.gov.uk

www.dcsf.gov.uk

Our ref: 2008/0013745

20 March 2008

Dear Mrs Walton

Thank you for your letter of 10 February to Kevin Brennan MP. I am sure you will appreciate that the Minister receives vast amounts of correspondence and is unable to reply to each one personally. On this occasion, I have been asked to reply on his behalf. Please accept my apologies for the delay in doing so.

The national adoption target for England ( covering the period April 2003 to March 2006), reflected the Government’s desire to reverse along term decline in the number of children already in care finding a permanent home through adoption. The intention of the target, which was largely achieved, was that thousands more of our most vulnerable children have had the chance to benefit from a stable, safe and loving family life, rather than remaining in care. There was never a financial incentive for local authorities to meet the national target, nor was the target allocated to individual local authorities. The target, having run its course and achieved its purpose, was not extended beyond March 2006. There are currently no plans to introduce a similar target.

Some local authorities have received “reward funding” through this process for increasing the number of children adopted from care – but this did not change the requirement that in each individual case adoption was in the child’s best interests and a court granted a placement order and, later, an adoption order. There is no evidence however that this has had any significant influence on the number of younger children (i.e. those under five) becoming looked after, as the overall figures for younger children becoming ‘looked after’ were virtually unchanged during the period in which the national target operated.

The 2006 Local Government White Paper commitments mean that the Government will only, from April 2008, agree target’s with local authorities against indicators drawn from the new national indicator set. There is no indicator within the national indicator set relating to the number of adoptions of children from care because the Government is content that the ‘backlog’ of children in care who were awaiting adoptive placements has been substantially dealt with in the period 2003 to 2006. There is, however, an indicator on the timeliness of placements for adoption. As central Government can only agree local targets that are based on the national indicator set, it will not in future be possible to agree with local authorities any targets to increase adoptions from care.

Legislation requires local authorities to ensure that children can live with their parents wherever possible, and that services should be provided to ‘children in need’ and their families to enable this to happen. The challenge for social workers is to keep children safe and, where possible, to keep families together. Sometimes this isn’t possible, so it is crucial that a child’s welfare is put first, and that they are effectively and speedily protected.

Sadly, thousands of children come into care every year because they cannot live at home in safety and young babies are the most vulnerable. In the court proceedings, the parent (and the child) is entitled to free legal aid enabling them to be legally represented.

Social Workers cannot remove children from their parents’ care (without the parents consent) without first referring the matter to a court and obtaining the authority of a court order. This is a fundamental safeguard in the care system. A court may only make a care order if it is satisfied that that the child concerned is suffering, or is likely to suffer, significant harm.

The development by local authorities of the view that a child should be placed for adoption is not made by one person but a range of people who scrutinise the adoption plan, in particular an Adoption Panel, most of the members of which are independent of the local authority. Only if the agency decision maker decides that adoption is in the best interests of a child can an application to the court for placement order is made (if the parents do not consent to adoption). It is then a matter for the court to decide whether to make a placement order and, later, an adoption order. No child is adopted from care without a court deciding it is in their best interests. This is a fundamental safeguard in the care system.

With regard to accountability in the courts, the government is developing pilots which will provide much more information to the public about family cases. The courts will be asked to produce a transcribed judgement or a decision summary or (in the family proceedings court) written reasons. The Government wants this information to be given to parents; retained for children so they can ask to see it when they become adults; and published anonymously so that the general public can easily access it.

The ‘Care Matters’ White Paper launched lat year set out a number of reforms which aim to make improvements in the care of vulnerable children. Spending to build upon these reforms will total £292 million over the period 2008-2011, and will include early identification and support to enable children who are at risk of going into care to remain with their families. Supplementing this, are proposals for a ‘gateway approach’ to family and friends care to make sure that it is considered as an option at the first and every subsequent stage of decision making about care and permanence options for a child- for example, by introducing a requirement that relatives and friends are, as far as possible, considered in all cases as potential carers as part of the care plan lodged with the court at the outset of care proceedings.

No comments: