A new report produced by London based charity, Children & Families Across Borders (CFAB), urges greater cooperation between the UK and international authorities in cases where parents and children flee abroad to avoid child protection investigations. The call comes as the UK prepares to leave the EU, potentially reducing the ability of local authorities to locate children who leave the island after being classified as vulnerable by social workers.
CFAB is the UK branch of the International Social Service network and works with partners overseas in over 100 countries on cases that require cross-border cooperation. The Esmée Fairbairn Foundation, which funded the report, is one of the largest independent grant-makers in the UK.
Parents leaving the UK with their children after social services raise child protection concerns is on the rise in Britain, as families claim financial incentives for adoptions are leading councils to remove children unjustly. The adoption and fostering industry, which has suffered under budget cuts, has also been criticised for unethical practices, including pushing incentives for adoptions and allowing social workers in councils to start their own agencies to recruit and place children.
Researchers and academics are also starting to question the effectiveness of social work practices in the UK. A newly discovered research paper, “Parenting Capacity Assessment as a Colonial Strategy”, looks at whether the current process of assessing parents’ capacity to parent is perhaps an outdated way of supporting vulnerable families.
The CFAB report, “Cross-border child safeguarding: Challenges, effective social work practice and outcomes for children”, is part of an emerging body of research looking at children’s social work. The study was undertaken in 2017-2018 in order to better understand policy and practice related to cross-border children and social work cases involving families.
Here are some key stats from the report:
- A total of 330 children were involved in the study
- The researchers audited 200 cases, 100 of which involved children in need of protection who had travelled to another country or had come into the UK
- More than three-quarters (157 cases) involved an outgoing case with a request from the UK to another country
- The age demographic with the largest representation was 0-5 years (133 children)
- The majority of children in the study were non-British EU nationals (142 children), followed by British nationals (102 children)
- It took an average of 45 days for an international child protection alert to be issued when a child deemed at risk had travelled abroad, perhaps due to an inability to locate the child’s whereabouts overseas
One of the most interesting facts mentioned in the report stems around what happens once a child flees the UK. The study says that a large number of cases involving a welfare visit following a child protection alert to another country or to a UK local authority resulted in no further action. Of the 53 cases where a welfare visit was completed following a child protection alert, the vast majority (70%) ended in no further action. The study is quick to suggest that this finding may in part be due to poor assessment standards in foreign countries, but does not consider the possibility that social services in the UK may have incorrectly assessed families in the first instance.
While the study claims to cover two areas – children crossing international borders, who social workers flag as in need of protection; and children in the social care system who can be placed with family in another country – the emphasis appears to be on families who leave the UK to avoid child protection proceedings. It also appears to focus on trying to retain control of cases once they go overseas by inviting the production of a new framework in which social workers in other jurisdictions agree to effectively hand over the reins to UK social services.
The authors of the report were CFAB’s CEO, Carolyn Housman and social worker Angela Wilson, who also works at CFAB. The Research Advisory Group were:
- David Jones, CFAB Trustee
- Marion Davis, CFAB Trustee
- Brian Littlechild, University of Hertfordshire
- Karen Lyons, London Metropolitan University
- Dez Holmes, Research in Practice
- Emily Halliday, CAFCASS
- Helen Johnston, CAFCASS.
Further reading on this subject:
- FOI: UK Residents fleeing the UK to avoid their children being unlawfully kidnapped
- DfE, Working with Foreign Authorities: Child Protection Cases and Care Orders – Departmental Advice for Local Authorities, Social Workers, Service Managers and Children’s Services Lawyers (2014)
- Revealed: the networks helping families flee social services (2012)
- British families flee to Ireland to escape threat of social services (2015)
- Parents who fled with child to Ireland ordered to bring baby back (2018)
Researching Reform 
I would say that the main reason parents flee UK with their babies and Young children is not just to avoid family court proceedings but to avoid FORCED ADOPTION !
Pregnant women who flee to Ireland,France,and Spain cannot avoid social services in those countries when they give birth there , but at least they avoid their children being adopted for agency profits in the UK !
Only the agency profit motive sends social workers at great government expense to foreign countries to start proceedings there and to seize their child booty for the return to the UK and forced adoption !
LikeLiked by 1 person
The fact that the majority of cases result in no further action is not because of poor assessment practices in other countries, but rather a condemnation of our own over zealous, financially driven corrupt system.
I attended a seminar at the Czech parliament a couple of years ago, where an organisation called LUMOS was attempting to seduce the Czech and Slovak governments to adopt the UK system of child protection, when in fact the current system in place is far superior.
There is a much smaller percentage of children in care, the vast majority are placed with other family members wherever possible and those in children’s homes are allowed unsupervised visits from family members every weekend.
The cost to the taxpayer is a small fraction of that of our own system because there is no involvement from Private profit driven agencies.
LikeLiked by 1 person
this British based charity would appear to be influencing ISS.
The advice given by advisory organisations is to flee the country as fast as possible as ttheir kids will end up in Care and probably be Forced Adopted. Or flee back to Ireland or Slav countries.
Wot a cheek ! There were the International Incidents between ourselves and Slovakia a few years back with the FCO Mandarins dreading hearing the chants of “Britain the thief of children, Britain return our children” coming over the phone as our ambassador rang into say the embassy was surrounded by demonstrators.
Also our SSD’s insist on pursuing families as the believe our Child Protection is so much superior than the continent’s.
LikeLike
I fled not once but twice …..
The first instance I fled to Ireland the Uk “took the reins” and dictated the case management baby removed at birth sent to the Uk forcefully adopted my daughter went through 7 placements before her first birthday the Uk paperwork before her birth stated she was to be adopted and they were unwilling to alter that course at all regardless of evidence to support the alternatives
The second instance again prior to birth the Uk stated adoption was their aim immediate removal at birth we fled to France underwent all assessments then Uk contacted them to demand removal they refused they had no concerns we moved then to the Netherlands again no concerns found after that we settled as planned in Germany again we were assessed no concerns found the Uk have tried to demand our now two children be removed time and time again despite not living in the Uk for many years now and leaving prior to birth they have no justification or jurisdiction over us at all yet each time Germany re-assesses us and finds no concerns and the Uk take it higher they have sent Interpol and special branch after us and attempted the embassy’s and other organisations !? We are not criminals there were no proceedings ongoing or even a baby prior to leaving the Uk
Those assessments aren’t lacking in the slightest indeed more invasive and intense than the Uk ones 6 plus hours a week with workers for them to watch and assess parenting skills monitoring food shopping bought and meals prepared delving into money management incomings and outgoings medical care home conditions etc etc and they are 6 month assessments so far longer than the uks
That clearly shows the EU assessments are far better and that it’s simply a case of Uk are plainly wrong it’s not child protection anymore it’s persecution for financial gains !
Our case is I am allegedly a risk of “unpredictable words and actions the
mother may from time to time exhibit” future risk of emotional harm My actual care is not a concern the Uk openly acknowledge the children thrive in my care meet their milestones the actual care extended to them is “without criticism” “excellent” “very good” they are “well provided for in clean and tidy homes conditions” “with age appropriate toys and games present” I am “proactive with their educational needs” and ensure all “medical appointments are attended regularly and on time”
clearly the EU countries forgot to borrow the uks pessimistic crystal balls and sought to actually look at the facts and evidence before them on how the children are ACTUALLY cared for rather then predict the future …….
LikeLike
As an after thought I’d welcome the authors of the report into my home with free access to undertake any such assessment as they wish to conclude independently whom is correct the Uk ( my children must still several years on be immediately removed and adopted to prevent future emotional harm) or the EU ( the children are happy and well cared for and should remain within our family to prevent emotional harm from removal )
If anyone has their contact details I’d appreciate them to set the challenge directly at them 😉 x
LikeLike
Hi and thank you for your comments. You can contact the authors by clicking on the link to the report and accessing their details online.
LikeLike
As far as I am aware no social worker,or judge has ever explained why UK social services pursue children in other countries even when parents have committed no crime by emigrating.
In the case above why did UK social services at great expense to the local authority take one child back to the UK and try to recover another from France and Germany?
Why did they not leave social services in those countries to deal with the situation?Could they not at least have allowed one or two babies escape their “spider’s web” ?
The answer is of course that the private companies running the fostering and adoption agencies make millions out of such children and they are often owned or directed by ex social workers and judges ! If one child escapes it will encourage others to do likewise !
Enough said……….
LikeLiked by 2 people