S (Children), Re [2017] EWFC B20 (15 December 2016)

S (Children), Re [2017] EWFC B20 (15 December 2016)

Placement with the father is not a realistic option due to lack of relationship, negative memories, insufficient insight into the children's complex needs, and risk of significant disruption and harm; the only realistic and welfare-compliant option is separate long-term foster placements with authority to refuse parental contact.

Citation
[2017] EWFC B20
Parties
Child: A; Child: B; Mother: M; Father: F; Applicant: Local Authority; Guardian: Children's Guardian (CG); Former Prospective Adopters: Mr and Mrs X; Father's Partner: Z; Maternal Grandmother: MGM
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 December 2016
Procedural Posture
Care Proceedings / Final Judgment
Outcome
Applications for discharge of care orders refused; placement orders revoked; section 34(4) orders made authorising refusal of contact; local authority plan for separate foster placements approved.
Legal Topics
Care Orders, Placement Orders, Contact Orders, Adoption, Parental Responsibility, Welfare of the Child
Family Law Child Protection Care Orders Placement Orders Contact Orders Adoption Parental Responsibility Welfare of the Child

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

A

Child

B

Child

M

Mother

F

Father

Local Authority

Applicant

Children's Guardian (CG)

Guardian

Mr and Mrs X

Former Prospective Adopters

Z

Father's Partner

MGM

Maternal Grandmother

Procedural Posture

Care Proceedings / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the children A and B should remain in local authority foster care placed separately or be placed together in the care of their father
  2. 2 Whether to revoke placement orders and authorise refusal of contact between children and parents
  3. 3 Whether to discharge care orders in favour of placement with father

Ratio Decidendi

Placement with the father is not a realistic option due to lack of relationship, negative memories, insufficient insight into the children's complex needs, and risk of significant disruption and harm; the only realistic and welfare-compliant option is separate long-term foster placements with authority to refuse parental contact.

Court Disposition

Applications for discharge of care orders refused; placement orders revoked; section 34(4) orders made authorising refusal of contact; local authority plan for separate foster placements approved.

Orders

  • Permission granted to local authority to withdraw applications for care orders in respect of A and B.
  • Placement orders revoked for both children.