• About
    • Privacy Policy
  • GSW
  • Guide To Making A Subject Access Request
  • In Dad’s Shoes
    • An Overview
    • Invitation
    • Media
    • Photos
    • Press Release
    • Soft Launch
    • Speeches
    • Summary
  • Media Coverage
  • Parliamentary Debates
  • Voice of the Child Podcasts

Researching Reform

Researching Reform

Daily Archives: October 10, 2018

Forced Adoption Of Babies More Than Doubles, National Study Of Newborns Reveals.

10 Wednesday Oct 2018

Posted by Natasha in forced adoption, Researching Reform

≈ 31 Comments

The first ever national study of newborns in England has revealed that the number of babies taken into care who are less than one week old, has more than doubled in a decade. In most instances, babies would have been taken from their mothers while still in hospital.

The research, which was carried out by Professor Karen Broadhurst, on behalf of the Nuffield Foundation, and which used data supplied by CAFCASS, found that care proceedings were issued for 1,039 newborns in 2007/8, (32% of all cases involving an infant age under 1 year). However, this number had more than doubled at 2,447 newborns (42% of all infant cases), by 2017.

The study also reveals marked differences in relation to the rates of babies being taking into care across regions in England. These variations have become a common feature of children’s social work practice across the country.

Despite the differences across regions, the study noticed an overall increase in the number of babies taken into care, nationwide.

The researchers now want to look at possible causes for removal and geographical fluctuations, who suspect that deprivation may be an underlying cause. This premise however, is not right. Families who experience poverty tend to ask their local councils for help, which is a strong indication that they are not only aware of the issues they face but understand that their children’s needs are not being met, and crucially, want to actively address those gaps. By contrast, vulnerable families are those who are suffering with any number of difficulties and are unable to identify and put their children’s needs first. Those families represent a very small percentage of the population, and so the astounding figures in this report are clearly disproportionate to the number of mothers and fathers who genuinely can’t look after their children. This also suggests that the large number of removals are not based on a lack of capacity to parent, but the system’s now widely documented flaws.

Those flaws include an ingrained culture which treats families asking for help like second class citizens, a system geared towards removal to fuel the adoption and fostering sectors, two of only a small number of initiatives inside the child protection sector still offering lucrative profit margins, and knee jerk reactions to budget cuts leading to councils going for the cheapest option every time, which usually translates into councils removing children from parents rather than offering support which could avoid tearing families apart in the first place. Poverty then, is not a root cause of child neglect and abuse, but a convenient gateway through which cash strapped councils can fund themselves.

The report has also reignited the debate on the family justice system’s use of the ‘risk of significant harm’ threshold, which judges and social workers currently use to decide whether or not to remove children from parents. The threshold has no established working definition, medical guidelines or official legal definition, instead allowing child protection professionals and judges to work from a rough checklist, using their own discretion, which some argue is far too wide for such a serious measure.

Some key stats and facts from the report:

  • Of those children less than one-year-old subject to care proceedings, 42% of cases concerned newborns. (2016/2017)
  • Almost every case identified by local authorities led to a care order being issued by a judge with most children being put up for adoption, foster care or extended family. Only 14% of children stayed with their birth parents
  • 47% of mothers had already had older children taken into care

You can read a summary of the report here.

The Nuffield Foundation will be working on a new project through their Family Justice Observatory, called ‘Infants in the family justice system’, which will be launched in 2019.

BIC.png

Share this:

  • WhatsApp
  • Pocket
  • Telegram
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Email
  • Print

Like this:

Like Loading...

Government Cancels Debate On Children’s Social Care, As Thousands Of Families Left Disappointed

10 Wednesday Oct 2018

Posted by Natasha in child welfare, event, Researching Reform

≈ 10 Comments

A discussion promised by the Backbench Business Committee, on children’s social care, was cancelled last night after the House of Commons ran out of time to hold the debate. Thousands of families had expressed an interest in the session after this site shared details of the event at the end of last week. Several parents also intended to travel from across the country to attend.

The debate was scheduled to take place yesterday evening, however a spate of last minute emergency questions around the death of Natasha Ednan-Laperouse, the teenager who died after eating a Pret A Manger sandwich, and the disposal of human waste at NHS hospitals left little time for the debate on children’s social care, which was the last debate on the agenda. The one other Backbench Business Committee debate, which looked at Baby Loss Awareness Week, was allowed to run for more than two hours. The debate on children’s social care was set to take place after it.

BFT

The debate, headed up by the motion, “That this House has considered children’s social care in England”, was to be opened by Tim Loughton MP. Researching Reform reached out to Tim last night to find out why the debate had been overlooked. Tim told us that the Chamber had run out of time to host the discussion, but that it would be given priority once new slots for backbench debates became available:

TLHOCD

Child welfare has become one of the most important political issues of our time, with the media regularly leading their coverage with stories about children’s rights and child wellbeing. The House of Commons’ failure to alert the public to the change in the agenda was clearly not in step with the growing demand for information about how the government treats children within a wide range of contexts, including social care.

With so many members of the public, child welfare professionals, parents and children interested in making a difference in this area, the government needs to respond effectively and make sure that it encourages participation in politics. It can start by keeping the public properly informed about its debates.

We’ll let you know as soon as more information about the debate is released.

Meeting HOC.png

 

Share this:

  • WhatsApp
  • Pocket
  • Telegram
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Email
  • Print

Like this:

Like Loading...

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 8,468 other subscribers

Contact Researching Reform

Huff Post Contributer

For Litigants in Person

Child Welfare Debates

October 2018
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031  
« Sep   Nov »

Children In The Vine : Stories From The Family Justice System

Categories

  • Adoption
  • All Party Parliamentary Group on Family Law and The Court of Protection
  • Articles
  • Big Data
  • Bills
  • Case Study
  • child abuse
  • child abuse inquiry
  • child welfare
  • Children
  • Children In The Vine
  • Circumcision
  • Civil Partnerships
  • Consultation
  • Conversations With…
  • Corporal Punishment
  • CSA
  • CSE
  • Data Pack
  • Domestic Violence
  • Encyclopaedia on Family and The Law
  • event
  • Family Law
  • Family Law Cases
  • FGM
  • FOI
  • forced adoption
  • Foster Care
  • Fudge of the Week
  • Fultemian Project
  • Huffington Post
  • Human Rights
  • IGM
  • Inquiry
  • Interesting Things
  • Interview
  • Judge of the Week
  • Judges
  • judicial bias
  • Law to lust for
  • legal aid
  • LexisNexis Family Law
  • LIP Service
  • LIPs
  • Marriage
  • McKenzie Friends
  • MGM
  • News
  • Notes
  • petition
  • Picture of the Month
  • Podcast
  • Question It
  • Random Review
  • Real Live Interviews
  • Research
  • Researching Reform
  • social services
  • social work
  • Spotlight
  • Stats
  • Terrorism
  • The Buzz
  • The Times
  • Troubled Families Programme
  • Twitter Conversations
  • Update
  • Voice of the Child
  • Voice of the Child Podcast
  • Westminster Debate
  • Who's Who Cabinet Ministers
  • Your Story

Recommended

  • Blawg Review
  • BlogCatalog
  • DaddyNatal
  • DadsHouse
  • Divorce Survivor
  • Enough Abuse UK
  • Family Law Week
  • Family Lore
  • Flawbord
  • GeekLawyer's Blog
  • Head of Legal
  • Just for Kids Law
  • Kensington Mums
  • Law Diva
  • Legal Aid Barristers
  • Lib Dem Lords
  • Lords of The Blog
  • Overlawyered
  • PAIN
  • Paul Bernal's Blog
  • Public Law Guide
  • Pupillage Blog
  • Real Lawyers Have Blogs
  • Story of Mum
  • Sue Atkins, BBC Parenting Coach
  • The Barrister Blog
  • The Magistrate's Blog
  • The Not So Big Society
  • Tracey McMahon
  • UK Freedom of Information Blog
  • WardBlawg

Archives

  • Follow Following
    • Researching Reform
    • Join 813 other followers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • Researching Reform
    • Customize
    • Follow Following
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Report this content
    • View site in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar
 

Loading Comments...
 

    %d bloggers like this: