C (Adoption – Procedural Irregularities), Re
[2023] EWFC 70 (B)
A (A Child): Contested Adoption and Local Authority Conduct, Re
11 July 2024
[2024] EWFC 192 (B)
Family Court
A little girl's foster parents wanted to adopt her, and her dad also wanted to raise her. Even though the dad seemed to improve, the judge decided it would be too upsetting for the girl to leave her foster parents, who she loves. So, the judge let the foster parents adopt her, but made sure the dad could still see her regularly.
Key Facts
- •A, a 3-year-old girl of African heritage, was subject to a Care Order and Placement Order in April 2022.
- •Mr. and Ms. X, her foster carers since birth, applied to adopt her.
- •LB Lewisham, the local authority, initially sought A's return to her father, Mr. Q, but later supported the adoption application.
- •Mr. Q's parenting capacity was a central issue, with conflicting assessments.
- •The case involved significant procedural irregularities and late disclosure by LB Lewisham.
- •Multiple professionals provided evidence, including social workers, a psychologist, and the Children's Guardian.
- •The IRO's statement was initially suppressed by LB Lewisham.
Legal Principles
A child's welfare is the paramount consideration in adoption proceedings.
Adoption and Children Act 2002, section 1
Adoption is a last resort, only justified in exceptional circumstances and by overriding requirements pertaining to the child's welfare.
Re B (A Child) (Care Proceedings: Threshold Criteria) [2013] UKSC 33
The court must consider proportionality and necessity when determining whether to sever family ties.
R and H v United Kingdom (Application No 35348/06); YC v United Kingdom (Application No 4547/10)
There is no presumption in favour of the natural family in adoption cases; the child's welfare prevails.
Re W (A Child) [2017] EWHC 829 Fam
The court must assess future risk of harm, considering likelihood, consequences, and mitigation.
Re K (Children: Placement Orders) [2020] EWCA Civ 1503
Article 8 rights of family life must be considered, but the child's welfare is paramount.
European Convention on Human Rights, Article 8
Outcomes
Adoption order granted to Mr. and Ms. X.
The court found that the risks of emotional harm to A were significantly greater if she were moved to her father's care than if she remained with her foster parents and was adopted. The court prioritized A's long-term welfare and emotional well-being.
Consent of Mr. Q and Ms. R dispensed with.
A's welfare requires it.
Contact order made for Mr. Q to have regular contact with A, starting with supervised visits, progressing to monthly overnight stays.
To maintain A's relationship with her birth father and brother.
Family Assistance Order to assist with the development of contact
To help manage the transition and maintain positive relationships.
Independent inquiry into the Meliot Centre ordered.
Concerns about bias and unprofessional conduct by staff.
LB Lewisham to review their handling of the case.
Significant failings identified in their approach, including failure to consider A's best interests holistically.