Darlington Borough Council v M & Ors
[2024] EWFC 193 (B)
Stockton Borough Council v M & Ors
18 September 2023
[2023] EWFC 260
Family Court
A baby's parents had some serious issues in the past. At first, social workers thought the baby should be adopted, but then they saw the parents were doing better, so they changed their mind. The judge decided the parents still needed a lot of help and support, so he made an order that lets social workers keep a close eye on the family to make sure everyone is safe. This is better than adoption, but it means the social workers will be involved for a long time.
Key Facts
- •C, a one-year-old, is the subject of care proceedings.
- •Mother (M) has a history of causing injuries to an older sibling, leading to that child's removal from her care.
- •Father (F) has complex mental health needs.
- •Initial concerns focused on M's lack of acceptance of responsibility for past harm and the inability to manage the risks.
- •An independent social work assessment and assessment by Children Northeast were conducted.
- •Assessments revealed both positive aspects of parental care and ongoing concerns (F's mental health, M's access to mental health support).
- •Children Northeast recommended reunification based on positive observations of parental care.
- •The local authority proposed a care order with gradual rehabilitation to parental care.
- •All parties agreed to the rehabilitation plan.
- •The court considered whether a care order or a supervision order was the appropriate measure.
Legal Principles
Child's welfare is paramount.
Children Act 1989, s.1(3)
Least interventionist approach should be preferred unless there are cogent reasons to the contrary.
Re O [1996] 2 FLR 755
Threshold criteria under s.31 Children Act 1989 must be met before making a care order.
Children Act 1989, s.31
Care order should not be used as a vehicle for support services unless necessary for child protection; alternatives should be explored.
Re JW [2023] EWCA Civ 944; President's Public Law Working Group Guidance 2018, paras. 158-162
Proportionality and necessity are key when deciding between care and supervision orders; care orders represent significant state intervention and must be justified.
Re JW [2023] EWCA Civ 944; President's Public Law Working Group Guidance 2018, Appendix F
Outcomes
Care order made in favour of the local authority.
High and complex risks associated with both parents, requiring long-term statutory oversight beyond the scope of a supervision order; the care order allows for risk management and ensures continued support and monitoring while keeping the child with parents.