New Initiatives Aim To Keep Birth Families Engaged with Children in Care

07 Monday Oct 2019

Posted by Natasha in Children, Foster Care, Researching Reform

Welcome to another week.

The government has unveiled plans to offer carers more support when looking after fostered children, while also preserving ties with birth families and their children after they have entered the care system.

According to the press release, the initiative aims to offer carers, “short breaks, mentoring, emergency sleepovers and social activities with other families to help create stability as they adjust to their new lives together.”

The support package has been inspired by The ‘Mockingbird Family Model’, which will be delivered by The Fostering Network and builds on an already invested £500,000 for support services for foster carers by the government. It is not clear how much extra money the government has injected into the original investment sum to provide these services.

The Model is explained on the Fostering Network’s website as an “extended family model which… improves the stability of fostering placements and strengthens the relationships between carers, children and young people, fostering services and birth families.”

The Network’s website also includes evaluation reports and plans for the model’s roll-out across the country.

In addition to this initiative, the Department for Education said it would allocate £84 million to new projects in 18 council areas which would “support vulnerable children coping with chaotic home lives as a result of their parents’ problems with mental health, domestic violence or addiction.” And, that the projects would “reaffirm the core principle of the Children Act 1989 that where possible, children are best brought up with their parents.”

No further details about how the Department intends to achieve this are included in the statement.

mockingbird_family_model_logo

Little Voices, Big Impact

16 Monday Sep 2019

Posted by Natasha in child welfare, Children, Researching Reform

≈ 4 Comments

Welcome to another week.

As the United Nations’ Convention on the Rights of the Child celebrates its 30th anniversary this year, the UN has decided to highlight the milestone with a campaign they have called Little Voices Big Impact.

The campaign runs today and includes a line-up of speakers in Geneva, who will be discussing the Convention and the state of child rights in 2019.

The UN are inviting people to pledge their support for child rights on Twitter, and as part of that campaign, we would like to ask children and young people to share their wishes about how they would like the UK government to protect their rights going forward. We invite families to share their thoughts too.

Screenshot 2019-09-16 at 10.25.35.png

Any responses we receive before 2pm London Time will be made into a collage and shared with the UN, who have promised to feature tweets using their campaign hash tag #LittleVoicesBigImpact, and include the sentiments in their discussions.

If you’d like to take part, please leave your pledge or wish, along with your first name (or ‘anon’ if you would rather not be identified) and your age, on the Researching Reform website.

UN0296105_CRC_30

Children and Mental Health Services – Parliamentary Debate

11 Thursday Jul 2019

Posted by Natasha in child welfare, Children, event, Researching Reform

≈ 1 Comment

A debate on children and their access to mental health services will take place in Parliament on 16 July.

The discussion has been organised by Andrew Griffiths MP.

Further details about the debate are not yet available but we will share them as soon as the House of Commons library offers the next update.

Councils have said that children experiencing mental health problems have increased by as much as 54 percent in the last four years, with more than 560 cases reported daily last year on average.

Figures by the Children’s Society suggest that at least 100,000 children are being denied access to mental health services because the problems are not deemed serious enough by adolescent mental health services.

In some parts of the UK, children are waiting up to a year for a mental health assessment.

Andrew Griffiths came to the public’s attention last year after he suffered a nervous breakdown. Griffiths was also investigated by the Conservative Party in 2018 for sending sexual messages to two women in his constituency. It was reported that he sent the women 2,000 messages in three weeks.

The debate will take place in Westminster Hall and will start at 2.30pm.

mental-health-2318328_960_720

New Child Abuse Claims in Vicky Haigh Case

08 Monday Jul 2019

Posted by Natasha in child abuse, Children, Family Law, Researching Reform

≈ 6 Comments

Allegations that Vicky Haigh’s ex partner was banned by UK Athletics from coaching children after he sexually groomed a child have been published on a US campaign site for women going through child contact proceedings with their children.

In 2010 Ms Haigh alleged that her partner had sexually abused their daughter. The family court took the view that the allegation was a lie and removed all contact between her and her daughter.

Vicky Haigh’s case drew media-wide attention when a court sentenced her to prison for breaching a non-molestation order, after she saw her daughter at a petrol station. Ms Haigh told the family court that the meeting had been a chance encounter.

Vicky was sentenced to three years in prison for breaching the order, which was reduced to nine months by the Court of Appeal. The sentence was re-instated in full after Ms Haigh gave an interview to a newspaper, shortly before she was due to be released.

The article which features the allegations against Ms Haigh’s ex partner was published by the Women’s Coalition on 29th June, and says:

“Vicky Haigh recently discovered that UK Athletics had banned her ex in 2015 from coaching children, after he sexually groomed and stalked a child, a criminal offence which often leads to sexual assault… Vicky found out about the ban when Doncaster Council filed a motion to discharge their care orders on her daughter.

Vicky’s ex-husband was found guilty of sexual misconduct with a minor by UK Athletics, resulting in a ban from coaching children…In failing to publicly report the ban, UK Athletics, Doncaster Council and Family Court have caused children in the community to be left at risk, including Vicky’s daughter.”

The article does not offer any source for the information it shares, but if there is a UK Athletics ban in place for Ms Haigh’s ex partner it is now in the public interest to know why it was set aside during child contact proceedings in the Haighs’ case.

Thank you to Charles Pragnell for alerting us to this development.

Disgraced MP tells Parliament – Thousands of Mothers are Alienating Fathers From their children.

02 Tuesday Jul 2019

Posted by Natasha in Children, Family Law, Researching Reform

≈ 4 Comments

The Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Bill had its second reading in the House of Commons on 25th June.

The comments during the discussion make for interesting reading, and the participants’ histories do too.

The Bill aims to remove the need to show fault during divorce proceedings in order to process an application for the termination of a marriage. The legislation aims to use modern language as well.

The Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Bill is a government bill, and it has been sponsored by Justice Secretary David Gauke.

Gauke was recently the subject of a no confidence vote by his constituency Conservative Association, for opposing a no-deal Brexit. The motion was defeated 123 to 61.

Currently the law requires anyone filing for a divorce to choose one of three fault-focused reasons: adultery, unreasonable behaviour and desertion.

There are two other options available: two years’ separation and five years’ separation, with the former requiring both parties to agree to the divorce.

The proposed legislation would keep irretrievable breakdown as the sole legal ground for divorce and dissolution but would replace the current requirement to show evidence of that breakdown with a conduct or separation fact combined with a statement. Couples would also have the option to make a joint statement. The proposals would remove the ability to contest an application for divorce.

The legislation includes a new minimum period of 20 weeks from the start of divorce proceedings to the point at which the applicant can confirm to the court that a conditional order could be made.

Speaking about the extended period, David Gauke said: “Our proposal will make the court process towards a conditional order less rushed and give couples further time to consider the implications of the divorce.

Between 2011 and 2018, around two thirds of cases reached conditional order in less than our proposed 20-week minimum period.”

Politicians discussing the proposed legislation made several thought-provoking, occasionally good-humoured, and at times controversial comments during the debate, so we thought we would share a selection.

Ivan Lewis, the former Labour MP investigated over sexual harassment allegations now running as an independent member of parliament used the debate to bring up parental alienation, and offered this view:

“I have only recently become involved in this campaign on parental alienation. Hundreds if not thousands of parents are estranged from their children because the resident parent seeks to manipulate the child against a non-resident parent for no reason whatsoever. Is it not time that we found a legal framework… to tackle this problem?”

A significant majority of resident parents are still mothers, which has led those engaged in the parental alienation debate to view gender as an inherent characteristic of those engaging in alienating behaviour. Data suggests that there are around 1.8 million single parents, of which 90% are single mothers.

Chris Bryant (Labour):

“I warmly congratulate the Government and the Secretary of State on introducing this Bill. I think I have married more people than anybody else in this House.”

Bryant was one of 90 Labour MPs to sign a letter asking Jeremy Corbin to launch a fresh review into anti-semitism allegations against MP Chris Williamson after he was readmitted to the party.

Labour MP Richard Burgon made the headlines last month after The Sun claimed Burgon used Nazi imagery for the promotion of a heavy metal album he produced with his band. Burgon sued the Sun for libel and won. He has also been accused of dragging his heels over legal aid reform by Labour campaigners.

Burgon offered this thought about marriage:

“I know that marriage is technically a contract, but it seems strange to think of it that way when it is such a personal and emotional thing.”

Fiona Bruce offered a hard-right perspective on divorce (and ended up hogging the debate so much that the Deputy Speaker had to shout “Move on!”):

“A lot of emerging research shows that the shock of marriage break-up can be greater for children when there has not been conflict in the parents’ relationship than when there has been.

I accept that not every marriage can be maintained and that it is sometimes better for one to end. I am also very much aware that many single and separated parents do a brilliant job. However, this Bill makes it easier to leave a marriage.

I do not believe that successive Governments have put in place policies and procedures to help to strengthen relationships, and this Bill will not do so either.”

Jim Shannon, a DUP MP mentioned a story in the media which we hadn’t seen. Shannon, who has the biggest expenses bill in Parliament, is being investigated by the parliamentary spending watchdog for the second time in three years. Jim said:

“Is [Fiona Bruce] aware of a story in the press a month or so ago about a father and mother who were divorcing, and when it came to deciding who would have responsibility for the children, neither parent wanted it?”

Conservative MP Julian Knight is part of an inquiry into reality TV in the UK, after a guest died on the Jeremy Kyle show:

“We should not have any lies in a legal process.”

Robert Neill, (Conservative):

“Prior to the 1969 Act, [Barristers] used to get what was called “ordinary hotel evidence”, which was an affidavit from the chambermaid or the waiter, who happened to have taken breakfast in bed to a couple.”

Neill is the chairman of the Commons justice select committee. He called out the government in June over its decision not to publish its review of what went wrong during a series of court IT meltdowns in January.

David Gauke:

“This Bill is by no means anti-marriage…. [it] is a Bill for anyone who agrees that the end of a relationship should be a time of reflection, and not of manufactured conflict.”

“The current requirement incentivises that sense of attribution of fault, which does nothing to ensure that the relationship between the two parents can be as strong as possible, and it is the children who lose out in those circumstances.”

“In the context of domestic abuse, for example, it is striking how the likes of Women’s Aid have been very supportive of these measures because of their concern that there might be women trapped in marriages who do not want to attribute blame because they feel that may result in a further deterioration in the relationship.”

“Continuing in a legal relationship that is no longer functioning can be destructive to families, and the law ought to deal with the reality of marriage breakdown as constructively as possible. The current law does not do that.”

“Whatever family structure children grow up in, they benefit most from stable, loving and caring relationships with parents and other close family members. We are clear that when parents have taken this difficult decision, children’s best interests are served by minimising conflict during and after the legal process.”

You can read the whole discussion here.

Samuel_D._Ehrhart_-_An_International_High_Noon_Divorce_(1906)

In The Best Interest Of The Child – Films

05 Wednesday Jun 2019

Posted by Natasha in Children, Foster Care, Researching Reform

≈ 7 Comments

As we were doing some research on child welfare topics this week we came across two films we hand’t shared before and which we thought may be of interest.

In the Best Interest of the Child – 1990

This film was released in America and looks at child sexual abuse within a home setting. Many of the themes in this film are still relevant today and highlight established behaviours in the context of child sexual abuse by a family member.

The film also shows how innocent parents try to protect their children when the law lets them down by fleeing with their children. That action is defined in law as kidnapping in both the US and the UK, and so the film asks us to think about whether these legal definitions are always fit for purpose.

Wikipedia’s summary of the film is good, so we’re adding it here:

“Jennifer Colton is a divorced mother and architect who retains custody of her five-year-old daughter Mandy while her ex-husband Walt is granted regular access. However, Jennifer becomes concerned by her daughter’s restless sleeping and increasingly violent behaviours and is horrified to discover it might be related to sexual abuse by the child’s father.

With the help of her attorney-cousin Howard Feldon, next-door neighbour and best friend Nora, as well as various doctors and therapists, Jennifer seeks to protect her daughter from Walt by having his access suspended.

Jennifer soon discovers that the law is not on her side when the court, in the absence of incontrovertible evidence, refuses to restrict Walt’s unsupervised-visitation rights. When Jennifer refuses to let her ex-husband see the child, the judge finds her in contempt and places her in a county jail until she relents.

Ultimately, Jennifer decides the only way to save Mandy from abuse is to “kidnap” the child. She is willing to go to prison so that Mandy can live in hiding with her relatives and away from her abusive father.”

In the Best Interest of the Children- 1992

This film is based on a real life case in Iowa, America and tells the story of a mother who loses her children to the care system. The film attracted significant public attention which led Iowa to implement legislation creating rights for children in foster care.

The case itself stemmed around a mother who suffered with manic-depression while looking after her five children. Her children are eventually taken from her and placed in foster care.

After Iowa amended its legislation to protect the rights of foster children in the state, the children in the case were subsequently placed in the care of their aunt and uncle and were able to visit their mother often, even though she continued to struggle with her mental illness.

ITBIOTC

UK Ranks 170 out of 181 for Children’s Rights in 2019

14 Tuesday May 2019

Posted by Natasha in child welfare, Children, Researching Reform

≈ 4 Comments

The UK has found itself at the bottom of a global index which monitors the enforcement, protection and promotion of children’s rights.

Dutch international children’s rights organization KidsRights placed the UK 170th out of 181 countries in its 2019 index.

The UK was also ranked 178th out of 181 countries when it came to providing an appropriate environment for children’s rights. The index included the UK’s performance over its implementation of the following elements:

The ‘best interest of the child’ policy,
Non-discrimination,
Respect for the views of children and their engagement in processes which affect them,
Enabling child-focused legislation,
Offering proper budgets for child welfare,
The collection and analysis of child-focused data and,
State-civil society cooperation for child rights.

Iceland ranked first in this year’s index, followed by Portugal, Switzerland, Finland and Germany marking the countries as the top five most successful states when it came to protecting children’s rights in 2019.

The nine countries ranked lower than the UK included war-torn countries and states which had experienced long-term conflict, such as the Democratic Republic of Congo, Sierra Leone, and Afghanistan which came in last on the index.

A report published at the same time as the index criticised the UK’s approach to children’s rights, noting systematic discrimination against child refugees and a lack of legal protection for children experiencing poverty.

A press release issued by KidsRights on 13th May offers the following information:

“The UK’s low rankings are attributed to discrimination against children from minority groups such as refugees or migrants. As well as concerns that the views of children, especially children from a poorer social background, are systematically not being heard in policymaking on issues that affect them and, insufficient investment in children’s rights.”

The UK ranked a little better in other areas, coming in at number 20 for domain life which assessed under 5 mortality, life expectancy at birth and maternal mortality ratio.

Other scores for the UK included:

35/ 181 – percentage of under 5s who were underweight, immunization of 1 year-old children, percentage of the population using improved sanitation facilities (urban and rural), percentage of the population using improved drinking water sources (urban and rural)
12/181- education, namely expected years of schooling of boys and girls, and gender inequality in expected years of schooling (absolute difference between girls and boys)
30/181 – child labour, adolescent birth rate and birth registration

Many thanks to Teresa for sharing this index with us.

Logo_new

House of Commons Debate on Food Poverty Affecting Children in the UK

08 Wednesday May 2019

Posted by Natasha in child welfare, Children, Researching Reform

≈ Leave a comment

A House of Commons debate looking at food poverty in the UK and how it is affecting children across the country is being held today.

The debate will discuss the Children’s Future Food Inquiry report, which offers insight into school food shortages, hunger and food poverty experienced by children in the UK.

The inquiry has prepared a briefing paper for anyone interested in learning more about the issues ahead of the debate which starts at 9.30am.

The report collected evidence through workshops with around 400 children; an academic review of child food insecurity; polling young people; evidence submissions from people working with children; a UK-wide policy review; and secondary analysis of Government data on the affordability of a healthy diet.

The report was launched on 25 April 2019 by the Inquiry’s Ambassador, Dame Emma Thompson and the Inquiry’s young Food Ambassadors, and makes the following recommendations:

Expanding free school meals;
Expanding voucher schemes and other policies to enable healthy eating
The creation of a Children’s Food Watchdog;
Addressing the marketing of unhealthy foods); and
Additional recommendations regarding free school meals including renaming it as a “school meal allowance to remove the stigma attached to free school meals

You can watch the debate online here.

CFFI

Government Holds Children’s Social Care Debate IN SECRET.

18 Friday Jan 2019

Posted by Natasha in Children, event, Researching Reform, social work

≈ 33 Comments

A government debate on children’s social care hosted by the Backbench Business Committee took place yesterday. In an unusual move, the Committee did not send out details about the public event before it was held in the House of Commons.

The debate which was sponsored by Tim Loughton MP and initially scheduled to take place in October, was quietly cancelled last year without notice after thousands of parents across the UK expressed interest in the discussion. Some families had set aside funds to travel down to the event, while others had arranged to take the day off work at personal expense to attend. Backbench Committee debates are open to the public. Families across the country reacted to the cancellation with disappointment, while some parents criticised the government for what they felt was a cowardly decision.

We asked Tim for a further update on the event in November, but did not receive a response. The children’s social care debate which took place on 17 January first came to this site’s attention this morning, after seeing a tweet by Labour MP, Emma Lewell-Buck which featured a video clip of her speaking at the event. Unlike the original discussion set to take place in October, the debate held yesterday afternoon did not feature in any of the Backbench Committee’s email updates.

The committee also failed to provide timely and detailed information about the event through its own dedicated page on the Parliament website, choosing this time round to publish only the bare minimum on a sub-page of a Research Briefings section within the site just two days before the event. The page does not offer any information on the time-slot for the debate, who is hosting it, where it will be held in the Commons or when a transcript of the discussion might be available. The only information offered is a summary report on children’s social care.

The debate was opened by Tim Loughton MP and started at around 3pm. Discussions went on for two hours, ending at 5pm. MPs who took part included Parliamentary Under Secretary Nadhim Zahawi, Emma Lewell-Buck, Alex Burghart, Karen Lee, Lyn Brown, Vicky Ford, Laura Smith, Mohammad Yasin and Luke Pollard. You can watch the discussion on Parliament TV.

The transcript of the debate is also available in Hansard.

Many thanks to Michael Roberts for sharing the link to the debate on Parliament TV.

Government Announces £45 Million In Funding To Recruit More Children’s Social Workers

08 Tuesday Jan 2019

Posted by Natasha in Children, Researching Reform, social work

≈ 6 Comments

The government announced this morning that it will be boosting the number of children’s social workers in the UK through a £45 million initiative which will aim to train up around 900 social workers by 2021.

The funding was secured by just one social work charity. Frontline, whose patrons include Labour MP Lord Adonis, and former Head of the Downing Street Policy Unit Camilla Cavendish, secured the multimillion-pound grant to recruit and train would-be children and family social workers. The grant was awarded after Frontline produced its own research suggesting that 44% of adults aged 18 – 34 were considering a change of career this year. The research also claims that a quarter of millennials (25%) would prioritise purpose over pay.

Education Secretary Damian Hinds says the recruitment drive will produce better social workers able to deliver a service that will do children justice, though it is unclear how funding alone might achieve better social work practice across the country.

The Department for Education’s press release points out that Frontline is a ‘top graduate recruiter’ which has trained over 1,000 people through its programme since 2013, but as social work practice is not improving throughout the country, this raises serious questions about the charity’s ability to deliver professional social workers. There is also no evidence offered in the press release – or the charity’s website – to show that Frontline’s training programme is better than any other across the United Kingdom.

In the press release the Education Secretary offers the following comments:

“Social workers are heroes, often unsung, of our society – working on the frontline to offer care and support to some of the most vulnerable children and families in the country.

Children’s social care is only as good as the people who deliver it, which is why we want to recruit, retain and develop the best social workers, so they can continue to offer the much-needed lifeline to those who need it most.

That’s why the Government is supporting Frontline with £45 million to continue their work in attracting and training bright graduates and career changers, who aspire for a rewarding career as a social worker.”