The Local Authority v M

IN THE EAST LONDON FAMILY COURT Neutral Citation Number: [2025] EWFC 148 (B) Case No. [redacted] Courtroom No. 3 The Law Courts 6th and 7th Floor, 11 Westferry Circus (Entrance in Columbus Courtyard) London E14 4HD Friday, 28th February 2025 B E T W E E N: Before: HER HONOUR JUDGE SUH THE LOCAL AUTHORITY and M MR O’BRIEN (Counsel) appeared on behalf of the Applicant MS ROBERTS (Counsel) appeared on behalf of the Respondent Mother MS BARRAN (Counsel) appeared on behalf of the Respondent Father MR FLETCHER (Counsel) appeared on behalf of OP MR DAVIES (Counsel) appeared on behalf of the Child through the Guardian JUDGMENT (Approved) This Transcript is Crown Copyright. It may not be reproduced in whole or in part, other than in accordance with relevant licence or with the express consent of the Authority. All rights are reserved. This judgment was delivered in private. The judge has given leave for this version of the judgment to be published on condition that (irrespective of what is contained in the judgment) in any published version of the judgment the anonymity of the children and members of their family must be strictly preserved. All persons, including representatives of the media, must ensure that this condition is strictly complied with. Failure to do so will be a contempt of court. HHJ SUH: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Today, I am concerned with OP, born on [redacted] , aged [redacted] , and QR , born on [redacted] and aged [redacted]. They are both subject to interim care orders made on 24 May 2023. This is an application for a care order dated 29 September 2022, and I heard this matter on 24, 25, 26 and 27 March 2025 at a final hearing. ST’s proceedings are going to be adjourned, so this judgment focuses carefully on the older boys. The threshold that I will approve later, however, relates to all three of them. The opening positions were as follows. The Local Authority seek care orders with a plan for residential placements for the two older boys and this is supported by the Guardian. The mother accepts it is better for the boys to stay where they are for the moment, and their father, does not object to care orders being made. OP wants to go home to his mother, as does QR, but OP accepts that because his mother is not actively challenging the evidence of the assessments of her that it is difficult for him to do so independently. 6. Mr O’Brien represents the Local Authority, Ms Roberts represents the mother, Ms Barran represents the father and OP is separately represented by Mr Fletcher. The other two children are represented by through their Guardian and Mr Davies. Background 7. 8. 9. By way of background, much of the chronology I set out in my fact finding judgment and the family first came to the attention of the Local Authority in 2005, following a drug raid on the family home, which resulted in the father’s arrest for possession of cannabis. As I have already set out in my previous judgment, the children were on child protection plans on two separate occasions, in July 2018 and July 2021. The history is set out in the fact finding judgment, and I will not repeat it here. At the beginning of these proceedings, the children were at home with the mother under an interim supervision order, but because the Local Authority were concerned that contrary to the safeguarding agreement, the children were still seeing their father, the matter returned to court in May 2023 and the children were removed into foster care. 10. OP and QR were together, and ST was in a separate placement. 11. As set out in the fact finding judgment, the father did not attend the fact finding hearing, and the reasons for his non-attendance are recorded in that judgment. He left for [redacted] on a single ticket on the day on which a witness summons was served for his attendance at court. Procedure 12. Looking at the procedure that I have adopted, Dr McGuire sets out that the mother is of low cognitive ability and her IQ falls at 71, so that is only two points higher than for individuals who are considered to have formal learning disability. 13. The expert view was that the mother’s lower ability is not immediately evident, even to herself as an expert, and she has extensive experience of working with people with lower cognitive ability, and so she alerted me to the fact it was possible when working with the mother, professionals or those within the court may not recognise how she is of low ability, and it takes time for her to understand information and we may not always recognise that she has not understood specific pieces of information. 14. The psychologist was clear that an intermediary was required and, throughout, I have considered Family Procedure Rules 3A and Practice Direction 3AA. An intermediary was 15. 16. there to help the mother throughout the fact finding hearing and took part in the hearing when she gave evidence. Following the fact finding hearing, new guidance has been put in place in relation to the use of intermediaries and, on behalf of Ms Roberts, it was submitted at the pretrial review that it was necessary for an intermediary only to attend when the mother gave evidence. In any event, at this hearing, we have not heard evidence, and the mother has not had to go in the witness box. She had the benefit of an intermediary on day two. Ms Roberts carefully set out the ground rules for the mother in her position statements, and the advocates have followed that good practice throughout. 18. 17. The submission that Ms Roberts makes now is that, since we are to adjourn the question of what should happen to ST to another date, that her client would benefit from an intermediary throughout. Ms Roberts has worked with the mother throughout these proceedings and knows her well. I, too, have had the benefit of seeing mother in the witness box and observed how she copes in court. I am satisfied that an intermediary is needed for the entirety of the final hearing in order for mother to give her best evidence and understand what is going on when, really, the decisions that the Court has to make on that occasion are some of the upmost gravity. In relation to the father’s involvement and fairness to him, I will record what has happened since the fact finding hearing. When I gave judgment on 15 March 2024, I was satisfied that the father was aware of the proceedings and that I might draw adverse inferences if he does not attend. I made it clear on the face of that order that he remains obliged to attend all future hearings and made directions for that order to be sent to him. 19. 20. He was arrested on 12 February 2025 in the UK, and the Court has been informed that he returned to the UK on 14 December 2024, but I am yet to see the evidence from the police, from social work records, to ascertain the accuracy of that position. Therefore, I will be making a further order for police disclosure and inviting the mother and maternal cousin, in due course, to put in a witness statement exactly what they were aware of about the father’s return to the UK. The father, of course, should also be invited to set out the details of his return. Evidence 21. When I look at the evidence, I remind myself that the Local Authority brings this case and it is for the Local Authority to prove it on the balance of probabilities. I remind myself of the case of Re B (Children) [2008] UKHL 35. I remind myself that a lot of the information we have in the voluminous bundles is hearsay and that has not been tested by the barristers in cross-examination, so I acknowledge the potential weaknesses of this evidence. 22. However, this was a final hearing at which witnesses were warned and, indeed, attended on day one and could have been challenged in the witness box, but that is not the basis on which I have been invited to proceed. It has been agreed that the advocates will give me submissions, which I have heard and I am grateful for, and that it was not necessary or proportionate to the issues for me to hear live evidence. I make it clear I have considered everything in the bundle. I have also revisited earlier bundles, which I have retained, including the evidence matters and police disclosures bundle. I may not refer to it all specifically in this judgment, but I will highlight the evidence that has been most material to my decision. I bear it all well in mind. 23. 24. Although the way forward for the two old boys is not opposed, I need to give reasons as to why I think this is the best for them. Evidence from Dr McGuire, the parenting assessors, the social workers and the Guardians has not been challenged in relation to the older boys, and the parents have been given a fair opportunity to do so, should they have wished to take this course. Also, time was taken, and preparation was made, in order for that to be a fully effective final hearing, but although the way forward has not been challenged in this way, I give a judgment on the totality of the evidence. Threshold 26. 25. The first matter I will turn to is the threshold and I have, very helpfully, been provided with what is called a consolidated final threshold document, which sets out very helpfully and clearly what the Local Authority say, what the parents’ responses are and, in particular, some of the mother’s responses are more detailed and put a different emphasis on the evidence to the Local Authority assertions. Some of her comments relate to the situation after the relevant date. I think it is important that, in the future, it is clear exactly what the Court found as a fact, so whilst the consolidated final threshold should remain a very important document in this case, what I have typed out is a document, the formatting probably needs a bit of attention, but it can be cut and pasted into the final order, which sets out what the Court has found as fact because we operate on a binary system in English law, where something is proved or it is not proved, and so I have prepared this fresh document that sets out the facts on which I make my order. Subsequently, what I will just do now is explain the rulings I make to reach this document, as it were. Therefore, it is very clear that the mother has responded to the threshold and accepts that it is met. The father has not responded to paragraphs 3 and 4, which relates to my fact finding judgment and the DNA test, in particular, and it has been have made it clear that these are matters relevant to the offences with which he has been charged and any comment, either admission or denial, may prejudice his position in criminal proceedings. Accordingly, that is the basis on which he responds to this document. 27. 28. However, I also think it is fair to record that the Court is satisfied that the father has had a fair opportunity to respond to the matters set out in the Local Authority’s case. He did respond to the interim threshold. He has been represented throughout. Every Court order has been sent to him at his email address, which he uses to communicate with his solicitors, and I made it clear on the face of the order of March 2024 that he remained obliged to attend all hearings. 29. At the pretrial review, I made it clear on the face of the order that both parents had until 4pm on 18 February 2025 to respond to the threshold, after which time, the Court is likely to proceed on the basis of the threshold, as pleaded by the Local Authority. 31. 30. To the best of my knowledge, and Ms Barran will correct me if I am wrong, at the time of this judgment, 28 February 2025, the father has not sought to set aside my judgment of March 2024 or to appeal it at the time or out of time. Subsequently, looking, then, at the documents, paragraph 3, I have gone back to my fact finding judgment which, of course, must always be read in its entirety, but I have set out the key findings that I made, so they are all in one place and it is clear exactly what those are. In relation to paragraph 4, I find that AB was conceived through the incestuous relationship between the father and UV, and I find that the DNA testing of OP, QR, ST and AB, suggested they had DNA from the same male relative. The Y chromosome profiles were consistent with them having the same father or a common male ancestor. 32. 33. The inference I draw from this, on the balance of probabilities, in the light of the evidence as a whole, is that the father in this case is AB’s father, and I so find. I find that the father has used proscribed drugs and alcohol. I leave paragraph 5 as drafted. It is clearly set out in the evidence in the bundles and backed up by that. In the same way, paragraphs 6 and 7 are made out. 34. 35. 36. 37. In relation to the parental relationship, I find that the parents had a volatile relationship, and I have looked back at all the evidence to see if it is fair that that is characterised as a relationship involving domestic abuse. The mother accepts that it is, and I have looked back at the Evidence Matters bundle. I recall the communication between the parents about another wife in [redacted]. I remind myself of the background to this case involving UV. I have reminded myself of the police disclosure and, looking at the totality of the evidence, I think it is fair to characterise the relationship of one that is abusive within the meaning of the Domestic Abuse Act 2021 and Practice Direction 12J. 41. 40. 39. 38. That, of course, means that by virtue of section 3 of the Domestic Abuse Act 2021, the boys themselves are victims of domestic abuse, whether they saw it, heard it, or experienced the effects of it. In relation to the wording around the children's copying behaviour, I have looked back at the totality of the evidence, and it seems to me, very clear, that the physical fights between UV and XY, between QR and OP, go beyond playfighting. There are consistent and voluminous references to their physical altercations in the bundle over a long period of time. I will give but a few: C113, C114, C208, C213, E69, E95, E163, and E73. Therefore, I have amended the wording to make it clear that the children copied this behaviour, and I have removed the reference to playfighting. In relation to the home environment, this is something that I will return to in relation to where things are now. I think it is right to say that there is a lack of consistency in the home environment, that it is not consistently clean and tidy, and I return to the statements of the first social worker in this respect. Subsequently, I have inserted, “It was dirty and messy at times and not consistently clean and tidy. Similarly, it has been cluttered and disorganised…” I insert “…at times,” because there is also evidence that the mother worked with the family support worker and did make some improvements. “The home, at times, smelled of urine,” I have amended because I think the evidence as a whole supports that. I note the mother’s qualification in her response documents, but I think paragraph 9B, as drafted, is an accurate reflection of the evidence as a whole. In relation to paragraph 9C, there was a gaping hole in the hallway from QR and OP fighting, and I have specified the broken outer pane of the double-glazed window of QR and OP’s room. I have returned to the evidence, and the social work evidence is very clear that that is the window that was broken, and that is at C128. I find that the clothes have been all over the floor and the kitchen, loose wires around the house and some of the beds have not had bedsheets or pillows. I note the mother’s qualification about why that may be, but that ground is still made out. I leave paragraph 9E unamended. In relation to the routines and boundaries, this is again something that I will look at in the welfare part of my judgment to see how things stand now, but I think it is important to stress that there is a longstanding pattern of neglect across the evidence. Therefore, although the relevant date is clearly key and important because it sets out why the social workers were so concerned, they came to court. There is a consistent pattern across the evidence over a number of years, which provides the factual background to the issue of routine and boundaries. I think it is right to insert that the children did not have effective and consistent boundaries and routines, and that is a fair reflection of the evidence as a whole. I have gone back to the evidence about video games and, it seems to me, when I look at F23, for example, that this is part of a background of longstanding concerns, but the evidence does not relate specifically to the relevant date, it looks back to a time in 2021 and 2022, 44. 45. 43. 42. 47. 46. when the boys were [ages redacted], when they were observed to be playing these games for much older people. That is part of the background as to why maybe they were struggling at school. I think it is right to say that they stayed up very late on occasion, did not get up and go to school consistently. I have set out, for the avoidance of any confusion, the exact attendance levels at various points in time for each of the boys. 48. 49. The evidence does support a finding that QR was not consistent in going to school, and the mother was not consistently using the reporting protocol, and I have the evidence at C92 that QR was, on occasion, falling asleep in primary school. 51. 52. 50. Although there was an improvement in the boys’ attendance by the time that the matter came to court, this was against a backdrop of inconsistent attendance of a level that impacted their education over a number of years, and I think it is right to say, as a matter of fact, that their attendance in foster care declined. In relation to the boys’ weight, it is a matter of fact that they were classed as overweight. Indeed, the clinical term used in some of the papers is, maybe more accurately, obese. In relation to the school nurse, I do not have the primary evidence here and the evidence I do have is slightly vague and contradictory at times, so C9, the social worker writes a statement that says that XY did not attend enough school for the school nurse to help her. F39 suggests it is OP and XY who were not seen by the nurse due to their absences in 2022. 53. 54. E152 suggests that the school nurse was actually working with the boys. There is hearsay evidence at C98 that QR was not seen by the school nurse for a health assessment, but in brackets, “(Spring 2022, unable to provide exact date as the school does not have access to the safeguarding files)” and I do not have the primary evidence in relation to this. 57. 56. 55. Also, I have got a sole entry in the primary evidence I can find, of 31 March 2022, where it is recorded by QR’s school that he was refusing to go into school, but Mother brought him in, and there was a school nurse appointment. Subsequently, looking across all the evidence about the school nurse that I can find, I am going to remove the reference to the lack of attendance, making the school nurse service ineffective, because the primary evidence that I need is lacking in places, and the evidence that I do have is slightly unclear and contradictory. In relation to OP and QR displaying antisocial and disruptive behaviour as a consequence of their experiences living at home, the parents, Mother in particular, accepts that the exposure of the boys to domestic abuse and the father’s behaviour will have impacted the way they behave. I will deal later in my judgment with how they are doing now, but I think it is fair to leave paragraph 12 as drafted and to note that their behaviour escalated during their time in foster care. I am going to remove paragraph 13 from this document, but deal with it in the welfare judgment because it looks at what the boys have been doing when they are in foster care, and I find that ST was at risk of being neglected in the same way and suffering significant emotional and physical harm as a consequence of his experience at home, and I leave paragraph 13 as drafted. 58. Welfare 59. Therefore, moving on to the welfare analysis and the welfare of OP and QR is my number one concern, and I remind myself of the no delay principle. I have expressly considered whether I could and should end proceedings for them today because I know it means that they lose their representation and their voice through the Guardian, but I am satisfied that both the Guardian and the social worker, who will both remain the same, will still involve the boys in what they want and what they think is important for ST and AB. 60. Looking at their wishes and feelings. Both QR and OP want to go home to their mother and, given their ages, I give this considerable weight, but it is not a decisive factor in the case where there are so many other things to balance and, despite their age, I look at the boys’ maturity, and they are not fully familiar with all the evidence that I have read or able to think through the ramifications of the findings made. For example, the Guardian notes that the boys do not truly understand the implications of their father’s sexual behaviour with their older sister, and they become angry, dismissive, or revert to childish and avoidant behaviours when this information is shared with them. 62. The relationship they have with AB is very complex and I know that both young men are 61. grappling with what this means for them. 63. OP has settled well in his current placement, where he has been since 18 December 2024, and there is a marked improvement, I think, in his presentation, engagement with professionals and education, as well as his extracurricular activities. Therefore, whilst he does not wish to stay there, the notes to the residential placements are a real credit to him, and he seems to exhibit some positive feelings towards the place he is in. He is a valued and respected member of that community in a very short space of time. 65. 64. QR moved placements on 22 February 2025, I think the Guardian’s analysis has a typo and says 22 January, so for QR it is very early days and I know that he told his mother that it is better than London when he spoke to her on the video link. I look at their physical, emotional and educational needs, and I am going to look first at QR, and he has [redacted condition], which is a hereditary syndrome that raises the risk of developing [redacted condition]. I saw he went for a [redacted procedure] on 13 July 2024, and I know that must be a really unpleasant and invasive investigation for a young person, but it is necessary to monitor any increasing susceptibility to that disease. 66. 67. He is clinically obese and taller than his peers. He struggled with continence issues that were not well managed at home, and he takes medication for this now. 69. 68. When meeting Dr McGuire in 2022, she spotted difficulty with his working memory, and she also says that he displayed some social anxiety and lacked confidence in his abilities and social relationships, and this has appeared to impact his engagement at school and how well he builds relationships with peers. In her updating assessment of 4 July 2024, Dr McGuire pointed out that QR displayed the same difficulties, but he also spoke of experiencing specific feelings of trauma, which had not been evidenced in her first assessment. She spoke of QR relating about his family being harmed and spoke about fearing the dark, or going to sleep or that something really bad might happen. She noted in her report that QR can often feel angry with other people about his situation, but also often feels sad and unhappy, he believes, because he does not like being in foster care. 70. 71. QR appeared to be heavily influenced by his older brother and showed signs of defiance and challenge to authority, the evidence suggests. 72. Dr McGuire, in her update of 2024, says that: “QR appears to have changed most significantly in terms of his behavioural presentation, whereas the boy I met in 2022 was polite, wanted to please me and was described by his teachers as well-behaved and conscientious. He now displays several difficulties with his behaviour and particularly at peers when led by OP. He is often late for school, refuses to go to bed, or engages in silly behaviours during lessons. While QR’s behavioural presentation means that others can view him as an intentionally resistant and rude, I wonder what this reflects about his emotional presentation. When engaging in my assessment and talking about those things that worry him, it was most evident that QR found it hard to manage those conversations, but had few skills to cope, meaning that he became rude and silly as a way of coping and avoiding conversation. It feels as if QR is feeling frightened, angry and unhappy, but have few skills to cope.” 73. For OP, Dr McGuire similarly noted difficulties with his working memory when she first met him in 2022, and trouble with remembering verbal information for short periods and manipulating this. He too had difficulties with urinary incontinence, but this seems better under control now, and he was discharged from the clinic on 20 February this year. He, too, has been classified as obese. 75. 74. Dr McGuire, in her assessment, says that OP reported symptoms reflective of a response to trauma. This was back in 2022, involving worries, intrusive memories, and him feeling angry. He appears to lack confidence in his social relationships and finds it hard to get close to others. In her updating assessment of OP, Dr McGuire thinks he tried to minimise any difficulties and presented as being less willing to speak about his feelings, but she noted he still describes as emotional problems that he reported during her first assessment, and that he can feel very angry, and she thinks he is angry with the adults around him. She was concerned in her 2024 assessment about the deterioration of OP’s emotional presentation. She is concerned, too, that he has become more defiant at school and that his behaviour is difficult. Since moving to a residential placement, he has positively attended school on site, and is doing maths, science, and English GCSEs with an aspiration to become a plumber. 76. 77. 79. 78. Dr McGuire takes the view for both boys that, “while I think their behavioural presentation may reflect, at least in part, in the emotional challenges they are facing, it appears they sometimes intentionally behave badly. I think their continual behavioural difficulties and then appearing to intentionally engage in these behaviours, though, through which they impact their own safety and ability to do well at school, reflect that they do not fully understand the long-term risks”. I want to look particularly to their emotional response to the findings, which I know have been shared with them in a very child-focused way and current social worker’s letter to them is a really impressive model of how to communicate very difficult concepts to young people. It is fair to say that they both struggled in different ways to engage in conversations about the findings. Dr McGuire says that they have grown up with dynamics at home with a family where a parent has sexually abused a child, and this might involve elements of ensuring that all family members keep secrets, learn not to trust others, and elements of control. She feels that this, in part, is the context for their response to what has happened. She says: 81. 80. “The situation is awful. I feel that the way in which OP and QR engaged with my assessment and their emotional and behavioural presentation reflects that they are clearly not coping and would benefit from support. They have not learned to trust adults, meaning that they will not speak to anyone and are unlikely to engage with any professional who tries to support them. I do not think they have the skills to communicate how they are feeling to others.” 82. Clearly, there needs to be a very careful piece of work for both boys, beginning to understand and process their responses to what has happened to them and their family. 83. The impact of the boys’ experiences to date seems to be profound. However, reading OP’s placement logs, I see small signs of hope. He relates well to members of staff, his room is clean and he shows an interest in his diet and exercise. He likes his room and his key worker, his hygiene has improved and so has his mood, and I do hope that this may be the beginning of change for him after all that he has been through. 84. QR too is in early days at his placement, but I have already noted how he told his mother it is better than in London, and there has been no reported disruptive behaviour and the local school will be found with his EHCP and, in the meantime, he will have support in virtual school. 86. 85. However, in order for these boys to thrive, they need to be able to build trusting relationships with the adults in these placements and accept, before they reach majority, the educational, emotional and therapeutic support which will be offered to them. I look at the likely effect on them of any change of circumstance, and they had two different foster placements before they were both separated in residential placements. I know that in the foster placements, they were observed to have been engaged in physical fighting and aggression, which, on occasion, required the police to be called, and that they struggled to engage with their education, and their behaviours were challenging. 87. They returned to their placement after curfew time and had poor hygiene and poor maintenance of their rooms. 88. The boys only have two or three years of their minority left and, when I look at the impact of change on them, in my view, they need help to process what has happened to their family and need help to build firm foundations for their independent future. 90. 89. A return home before it is ready for them would be a damaging change of circumstance, and if they were exposed to further risky behaviour by adults, unclear routines or boundaries, that would not be a helpful change of circumstance for them. It is very clear that the number of changes and difficulties that they have experienced have had a profound impact on them, and to return home and then to be removed again would be catastrophic in my opinion. What needs to happen if they are to return home, is for that to be done after work has really taken effect, and so they go home to a place that is able to support them and nurture them. I look at their age, sex and background, and, of course, they have UV, who is their older sister, born on [redacted] , and XY, their second older sister, born on [redacted]. Of course, they have ST and AB. OP, of course, will be turning [aged redacted] and I am really glad to see that the residential placement are making arrangements to make that a day to remember, and I hope that his mother will be able to celebrate with him around that time as well. 92. They are, of course, of mixed heritage, of white British and [redacted] heritage, and follow 91. 93. the [redacted] faith. They both speak English and [redacted]. I have gone back to the together and apart assessment for 2023. It notes a close sibling relationship between them, but of course, at that stage, final recommendations were not made, given the stage of proceedings. However, the social worker who did the together and apart assessment with the family and worked with them for a considerable period of time, observed that this sibling relationship will be important to them for their long-term emotional development and will enhance their ability to develop positive relationships in the future. 94. This relationship provides emotional support, a sense of stability, belonging and continuity, but it is also fair to say that OP and QR’s relationship is a complex one in which they frequently fight. Dr McGuire stated that she is worried that OP may be adopting a role or a feeling that he needs to protect the family through monitoring or controlling what QR says to adults and using emotionally abusive behaviours to do so. I am worried that he has learned and accepted the abusive dynamics, and this may impact on his future relationships. 95. 96. The Guardian, when she observed contact, noted that OP is quite controlling and authoritative over his younger brother, QR, and she noted that QR was acquiescent to OP’s requests, despite OP being generally unkind and, at times, demanding of QR. 97. Dr McGuire supported the separation of OP and QR and she reports that while this may upset them and mean that they initially regress in their behaviour and emotional presentation, in the long-term, QR may need this separation in order for him to make progress. The boys have now been separated and I hope that this will allow them to rebuild their relationship with some reflection and support. 99. 98. Looking at the harm the boys have suffered or are at risk of suffering, I have already referred to the threshold document, but I want to look at the parents’ ability to take concerns seriously, because this is relevant to the risk of harm in the future. If the mother, does not see the seriousness of what has happened in the past, it will be hard for her to make sure that harmful things do not happen in the future, and I have looked back at her ability to understand the impact of what is happening. The first social work statement says she has a tendency to minimise concerns raised by professionals, and there seems to be a lack of understanding of the harm to the children with the risks present. 100. This is a pattern, sadly, that continues through the evidence until we see the report of Dr Smith. Dr Smith is a specialist from the Lucy Faithfull Foundation, who assessed the mother and then offered to work with her. He says he would not be overly concerned about the mother perpetrating harmful acts herself, more of a concern is her not taking responsibility for general neglect and/or minimising or disassociating from signs of risk that emerge in the children’s lives. 101. He notes that she denies knowledge of the father’s use of Class A drugs and his criminality, which points to her either being either extremely naïve or extremely disassociated, both major and profound safeguarding deficits. 102. Dr Smith did not discern that the mother was motivated to have therapy to address her own victim issues, although this might change with time. He considered her strong tendency to disassociate from unpleasant realities: “Her historical deference and dependence on a stronger personality and her tolerance of sexual abuse are entrenched. She is also, in my view, not a psychologically minded person and, perhaps, lacks the complexity of conceptual thought to reflect on her victim experiences of sexual abuse and her subsequent shortcomings as a protective parent. Hence, I am not confident that therapy or safeguarding work would bring about significant positive change. The mother was offered sessions with Lucy Faithfull Foundation, but did not attend them all reliably.” 103. The mother’s own past makes it so difficult for her to engage with the risks in this case, and that is why therapy is so very important. 104. Also, I want to note that the mother agreed and, according to Ms Roberts, even suggested some of the things that are in our expectation document. A document that sets out what would need to change for the boys to go home, and that is movement, in my view, on the mother’s part, in the right direction. However, it is clear to me that therapeutic intervention will best help her to be able to spot harm in the future. 105. In relation to sexual harm, Dr Smith reports that the mother now accepts that the father had an incestuous relationship with their daughter, UV. However, though, she acknowledges the finding that she failed to protect her daughter, she is ambivalent with regard to taking responsibility for this, saying that there were no signs the daughter was being sexually abused when, clearly, this is not the case. 106. The avoidance of responsibility is part of a larger pattern of disassociation from unpalatable realities and Dr Smith says that “the mother’s rationale given to me in interview for not protecting her daughter, was that there were no signs of abuse, is the same one she provided for her own mother not protecting her from sexual abuse, indicating, in my view, that a failure to protect has been normalised for the mother”. Again, this highlights the importance of therapeutic help. 107. Dr Smith, at the time of writing his report, noted that the children’s father was removed from their lives because he is living in [redacted], hence the main source of risk from which the mother would need to protect the children no longer exists. He writes: “It might be the case that the children’s father will remain in [redacted] and the children will not encounter any individuals posing sexual risk in the future. However, if they do encounter risky individuals in the future, or if their father returns to the UK, I would not be confident in mother’s capacity to protect the children from emerging signs of risk, and this illustrates the need to address her therapeutic journey in order to be better able to protect her children in the future”. 108. I have looked across all the evidence and Dr McGuire says that the mother has minimised the years that Children Services have been involved with her and showed an insight into the lack of boundaries and how that can create a lax, chaotic environment where sexual abuse is more likely to occur. 109. The parenting assessor, whose parenting assessment is dated May 2024, notes that the foster carer says that QR and his brother touch each other inappropriately. QR is aware this is not acceptable and sometimes will apologise when corrected by his carer. This, too, may be suggested lax boundaries and personal space at home. 110. Therefore, when it comes to looking at future harm, these boys really need clear boundaries and guidance about how they behave as young men and what is safe and what is acceptable, in terms of sexual relationships, and the evidence suggests at present that neither parent are best equipped to provide this. 111. When I look at the risk of future harm, domestic abuse or dysfunctional relationships are an aspect of this, and the mother maintained in the early stages of proceedings that there was no domestic abuse. She accepted that there was to the parenting assessor, but seems not to accept it to Dr Smith. 112. She accepts it, again, through Ms Roberts in her threshold documents, but the father does not. 113. I have already reviewed the evidence and said that, in my view, there is a clear power imbalance in this relationship and it is fair to characterise it in terms of being abusive. The mother’s appreciation of this has been fluctuating across the evidence. 114. The social work team was concerned that the mother may struggle to put into practice what she has learned in the Positive Change programme, which is a program about healthy relationships: “She was unable to assure me that she would act differently if she was in another abusive relationship. Her solution is that she will focus on the children and not get into any other relationship. I have asked the mother to tell me good things about herself, and she struggled to say anything positive about herself, despite thinking hard about it, because of her low self-esteem and poor understanding of domestic abuse. She remains vulnerable to being in relationships where there is domestic abuse. Irrespective of her separation from the father, I am minded that their relationship is a long one and the mother’s need to be in a relationship appears to have been prioritised over the basic care of the children when the couple were together.” 115. The support worker took the view that the mother was not open about when she was in contact with the father and that was the finding that I made when I looked at the fact finding hearing and the father’s visits to the family home. The social worker was concerned in final evidence that the mother was unlikely to have the strength to stand up to the father. 116. I will gather evidence to look, if necessary, at what was known about when the father was back in the UK, so I make no findings, but what is clear is that the mother could benefit from greater reflection on healthy relationships. Dr Smith, for example, says that: “the mother was in complete denial about the unequal power dynamics between her and the father, which probably contributed to creating a domestic environment where incest occurred. I am glad that the mother now accepts that this was not a healthy relationship, and I am glad that she agrees to be signposted to more domestic abuse work. I really want to give her credit for her part-time job. She has She is getting some more financial done that for herself. independence, but it seems to me that she has some way to go in minimising the risk of future harm in this respect.” 117. I look at how capable each of the parents is of meeting the children’s needs. Paternal family members who have been assessed have not been assessed positively and have not challenged those assessments. The father has not put himself forward to care for the children. His engagement with the parenting assessment back in 2023 was said to be superficial, and he did not accept the Local Authority's concerns were significant. 118. The assessor at that time thought that his ability to consistently engage with any services that would improve his parenting was poor in the past, and that they were not confident that he would engage in the future. That prediction, indeed, came to pass, as the father effectively disengaged from these proceedings for a long period. 119. Dr McGuire notes, based on my findings, “the father’s criminal record and psychological profile, his level of antisocial deviance is considerable, and he would likely pose a risk of harm, of being emotionally or physically abusive to both male and female children in his care”. That, in my view, is an opinion which is consistent with the totality of the evidence. 120. Therefore, he cannot, for those reasons, meet the children’s needs, and the extent to which he can meet their needs for contact with him needs to be the subject of a very careful risk assessment by the social worker to make sure that that is a positive experience for the children. 121. When I look at the mother, she clearly loves her children. She cooks for them, she provides food at contact, which is home made. She is affectionate and she gives lots of cuddles and kisses. She praises them in contact, she encourages them, she turns up to contact, she turns up to court, she does not dispute the facts found, even though they are very painful for her to hear. Also, she has gone to assessments and classes to the best of her ability. 122. She has, however, had a range of support over the past few years. In 2022, there was a floating support worker. She did the Strengthening Families course that year. She did Triple P in 2024. She attended Positive Change. She started again with the Strengthening Families course in November 2024, but there were not sufficient people to complete that course, so she was offered a place in the January 2025 one, and, for various reasons, she missed the first three sessions. 123. Dr Smith was commissioned to work with the mother, but at the midway point, that work ended owing to the limited attendance of the mother and her limited ability to engage with her therapeutic work when she did attend. Dr Smith concluded he was not confident that therapy or safeguarding work would bring about significant positive change. 124. At times, she struggled to engage with the parenting assessors, Lucy Faithfull and the Guardian, on 18 February this year 2025, and she says that this is due to her disturbed sleep. She has not seen a GP yet about it, and I am really glad that she has got an appointment in March. I hope the social worker will write a letter for her that summarises exactly what has been going on for the mother so that GP can help her as best as possible. 125. I know that the father’s family were a large source of support for the family in the past and that without them, she is left very isolated and vulnerable. 126. In order to meet the children’s needs, I think the mother first needs to meet her own, and by any analysis, the mother has not had an easy life. She was the victim of sexual abuse in her childhood when she lost her mother at a young age, and the findings of the Court speak for themselves. 127. The two parenting assessments, which predate the fact finding, predate Dr McGuire, suggest that therapeutic support is needed for her to work through the past. 128. The social worker, in her 2024 assessment records that the mother did not think she needed help and only reluctantly agreed to speak to the GP, and that is the position that she does not seem to have significantly changed when the mother spoke to Dr Smith, so I am glad that the mother has taken that first step of booking a GP appointment and I think it is now down to the mother to ask for therapy. 129. It is not reasonable, in my view, for me to expect or ask the Local Authority to fund it, they funded Lucy Faithfull and they were right to do so, but they have, I think, met their commitments in this regard. 130. Looking at her ability to work with the Local Authority, I have gone back over the first social work chronology that sets out the range of support offered to this family since 2014. That is now over a 10-year period and the theme of that chronology is that the mother missed sessions and does not engage consistently. 131. In the parenting assessment before proceedings started, she missed several sessions, and this parenting assessment ended early and she also missed sessions with the family support worker. She does have the ability to take on advice, so the first social worker said she is willing to change by taking on advice and being active in decluttering the home. However, the evidence suggests that the difficulty is sustaining that change. 132. In the second parenting assessment on 16 January 2023, the assessor again spoke to the floating support worker who had been working with the mother since 2022. Her report was that she provided the mother with all the relevant advice and guidance and now the mother needs to implement that by making improvements to her parenting and it was up to her to put it into practice. 133. Subsequently, looking across the evidence, there is a pattern over the years of the mother really trying her best, I think, to work with the social workers, but not being able to sustain change or share information in a timely way. For example, in my fact finding judgment, I remarked on the fact that the mother did not tell the social worker that UV was pregnant. 134. The current social worker, in her final social work statement, sets out that: “The mother presents as being friendly and kind and very respectful. Throughout my working relationship with the mother, she has demonstrated some ability to take on board advice provided to her, particularly in relation to the children’s phone or praising them when they behave well at school and in their placement. She has never been disrespectful towards me. She has encouraged her children not to be disrespectful towards adults, and she is always smiling no matter what the situation is, which makes her a very pleasant person to work with.” 135. However, this social worker is also worried that the mother struggles to share information clearly and consistently, such as about the boys’ mobiles and whether they have been returned to the boys. She thinks that the mother has colluded with the boys allowing them to remain at her house after the curfew time imposed for them to return to foster carers. Also, there is a particularly telling entry in the evidence at page 641 in the bundle relating to July 2024: “[ I was at ] the mother’s home address on the 16/07/2024 following concerns that OP and QR were attending the home address. OP and QR were both seen entering the home at 4:53pm (please see pictures of the boys entering and leaving the home). It is important to note that upon arrival to the home address at 4:40pm, I rang the mother and she confirmed she was at work and that she will finish at 6pm. At 6:30pm, the mother arrived home and at this time, OP and QR was still at the address. The mother was observed leaving the home at 18:58 and returned at 19:13 with a white plastic bag in her hand which appeared to have takeaway food inside. OP and QR did not exit the home address until approximately 8:02pm. I confronted the mother about the boys being at the address, the mothed looked straight at QR and OP and asked them “what are you doing here” and she then said to me, they were not in her house. At the time, the mother was not aware that I had already spoken to the boys and asked them why they were at the home, and they did not deny being there. I am worried that the mother did not encourage OP and QR to leave immediately after returning home, despite having a conversation with her on the 19/10/2023 whereby she was advised to encourage the boys to return to their placement if they were to attend her address”. Similarly, in her September statement, the social worker notes that although the police visited the home on 4 September 2024 to check on UV, the mother did not tell the social worker this, even though she saw her at court the next day. 136. I want to look at the family home, and the first social work statement describes the home being messy, cluttered, disorganised and sometimes with lingering unpleasant odours. The first parenting assessment records QR saying his house is dirty all the time, the bathroom is not clean, and the clothes are not washed or put away. Also, the observation of the parenting assessors matches with this. There are issues about the physical condition of the house, which present concerns. Any change is not maintained, and the house is often dirty and untidy. 137. The Local Authority then put more support in place under the interim supervision orders, and, according to the statement of the first social worker, dated 31 March 2023, the home conditions can, at times, be satisfactory, but they still require improvement despite several discussions on occasion. 138. In the social work statement of May 2023 the writer suggests that the home has been unclean and untidy and there is a pattern of the beds not having bedding on them and clothes being scattered across the floor. 139. The final social work statement charts similar concerns in 2024 and, clearly, the photos of the home in July 2024 show it is suboptimal and the social worker charts her visits in July and August of that year and observes that the home is untidy, cluttered and dirty and she thinks three is a significant risk of harm to the children’s health from it. 140. Then again, the mother can make some changes, so when UV’s social worker visited a month later in September 2024, she describes the place as immaculate and the mother shows some undated photographs with her statement which do show that the kitchen is impeccable and that she has decluttered the hall and the living room. 141. However, the pattern over a period of years is really very poor home conditions and of changes that are made but not sustained in the long term. In order for the boys to go home, there needs to be a consistently clean and safe environment for them. 142. Looking at boundaries. The overall picture of family life when the family lived together was chaotic. UV and XY are recorded as having physical altercations and so were QR and OP. Also, the parenting assessor, on 16 January 2023 records that the children continue to take out their disagreements and frustrations on each other, and the gaping gap in the hallway referred to in the threshold document is seen by a number of professionals and is the result of the boys fighting. 143. In the first assessment of Dr McGuire in 2022, the mother has difficulty setting limits around the children and managing their behaviour. The final parenting assessment in 2024, sadly, does not suggest much progress. The social worker observed a contact and she noted that: “The mother was informed that OP had been suspended from school, but Ms A did not raise this with OP, nor did she admonish him. When I raised this with her after contact, she said she had addressed this before, but I am concerned that when the mother avoids raising issues, it reaffirms to her son that there is nothing wrong with his behaviour. Through her unspoken words and silence, she is indirectly giving mixed messages to her son about there being nothing wrong with his behaviour.” 144. The older boys’ behaviour can be challenging, and although the mother has done Triple P and tried to implement some of the strategies, the social worker’s view remains that she struggles to do so. 145. She has been able to put some boundaries in contact, to an extent, when I look over the contact records, but in other respects, she finds it hard to do so consistently. For an example of this where the boys were not meant to be at her house and she took their mobile phones but returned them without telling the social worker. The mother said she genuinely forgot that she had taken the children’s phones and had not been intentionally dishonest with professionals. 146. However, the boys got their phones back, which means that the punishment was not entirely effective, and this incident is suggestive of the difficulties that arise if the parent cannot be consistent in the way that they approach issues or share information reliably and promptly with the social work team so that they can be consistent too. 147. The contact notes suggest that on occasion the mother was unable to assert authority when QR and OP were arguing, and the Guardian notes that when she saw contact, the older boys spent most of the visit ignoring their mother’s attempts to put in place boundaries. 148. In spring 2024, the parenting assessor observed how well the mother was doing, enforcing boundaries for the older two, XY and UV. XY kept calling her mother to turn on the internet on her phone, even though the mother said she was busy. In addition, XY had friends come to the house, even though her mother said friends could not visit. Both XY and UV ignored their mother and what she said. 149. The assessing social worker concludes that her parenting style is permissive, lenient with few demands, and uninvolved, provides little guidance and support, which is neglectful. 150. Dr McGuire said: “if they were to return to their mother and professionals could be sure she could provide a stable, safe and supportive environment, this would need to be one in which the mother can support them emotionally, set the boundaries around their behaviour, meet their physical and health needs, protect them from harm and the dynamic of abusive relationships. However, on reading the assessments and considering the boys’ presentation, I have significant concerns that the mother will not be able to offer what they need. I feel that due to the impact of their experience, they are more vulnerable than other children and, in particular, will need more stability and boundaries”. 151. The mother accepts that the residential placements are better placed to get the boys to school, but I agree with Mr O’Brien’s submission that it goes beyond that. The clear evidence over a number of years is that there are unclear boundaries, a lack of predictability in security and parenting, and the mother is not able to stop the boys visiting her home rather than going back to the foster carers. There needs to be a firm foundation of rules and structure in place if the boys are to return to the mother’s care. 152. She also needs to be able to meet their emotional needs, and the assessing social worker concludes that there is no evidence that the mother has the emotional capacity to support OP and QR with the trauma that they are experiencing. This is not a home, in my view, that is emotionally attuned or able to talk about process or deal with what is a very painful and complex situation. Therefore, the mother is right to accept that the boys really do need therapeutic support, and so does she, and, in my view, this must happen in order for the boys to go home and for their emotional needs to be capable of being met. 153. I look at the other adults in the house as an aspect of whether the boys’ needs would be met if they went home now. XY’s at home and not in education or work. The mother says she wants to move out and that she will support her in this. 154. On 6 September last year, a police Merlin report was received which raised safeguarding concerns about UV being a vulnerable adult, addicted to crack cocaine, and the police visited on 4 September 2024. The police officer stated that at the time of their visit, UV answered the door and was under the influence of substances. She told the police during the visit that she is taking crack cocaine. 155. The report stated her clothes were dirty, she had self-harm marks on her arms that looked recent, and she reported she had not slept for six days because she was binging on crack cocaine, following her family time being cancelled. In addition, the police also raised concerns about her boyfriend, who had recently been released from prison for drug supply. 156. Clearly, UV is not in a good place and, should the boys return home, they would be exposed to potentially her substance misuse and distress, and it is clear that UV and XY invite people into the home, young adults and their friends, and the evidence does not suggest to me that at present the mother would be effective in preventing this or ensuring that any adult in that home is a good influence for the boys. 157. C says that UV has made enquiries with Housing and wants to move out, but clearly there is a very complex dynamic at home between UV and her mother that should not go unaddressed, and it has not been explored how the boys would relate to UV, their view of her in light of the abuse that she suffered, or whether they would be exposed to a very difficult dynamic between UV and their mother. 158. Therefore, it is potentially a highly damaging situation for the boys to be in, unless all the adults in the home are safe adults and able to communicate with each other in an effective way. Options 159. I have to consider the range of powers that I have and look at all the realistic options for the boys. The first option, of course, is them going home to their mother, who loves them, and the advantage of this is they would all be together as a family and it is what the boys want, and at times she has been able to make the home clean and tidy, and she is seeking help from her GP, she has got her part-time job, she is doing what she can to be the best mother that she can be. 160. However, against this, I weigh the long history of inconsistent boundaries and the boys fighting, the history of physical altercations in the household, that the mother still struggles to share information with the social worker, but each of the boys have really very complex emotional needs now, and I think she would struggle to meet them all. 161. The risk of harm, given the findings made, has not been reduced by the mother doing the work that she needs to do therapeutically to address this. She has not had that therapy to address her own complex past. She has been very dependent on the father in the past, and I cannot rule out that she may enter a new relationship and become dependent on someone. She needs to do her domestic abuse work and let it sink in. 162. There is a complexity in the relationships in the home with UV and, of course, with AB’s proceedings, and the long involvement by Social Services has not led to sustained improvements at home. Also, for the boys to be returned and removed again would be absolutely catastrophic. 163. In relation to the residential placement, in favour of this therapeutic help will be offered, I am assured, at each placement for each child. The boys will be given the best chance of getting to school and doing their GCSEs. They will be with skilled, vetted carers. They will be given help to become independent, to reflect on relationships with themselves and in their self-care. They will be able to see their family together in contact. OP has responded really well to his start and his placement, and QR is beginning to settle in. 164. Against this, I know it is not what the boys want. They miss their mother, they miss her emotional warmth, they miss her cooking, and they are separated from each other. There is always a risk with people of their age that they might vote with their feet, although they have not showed signs of doing that, and they will have social workers acting as the corporate parent for them, making decisions about their lives, which is a level of intrusion that is particularly difficult for older teenagers. 165. Subsequently, when I look at what order is both necessary and proportionate, I remind myself that I should only interfere in the life of a family where it is necessary to do so. 166. However, I am satisfied that a care order with a plan for the boys to stay in residential care is both necessary and proportionate. Sadly, I cannot envisage that the parents will be in a position to provide the care that they need in the near future, until that work is done. 167. In relation to case management, I will just turn to the following issues. I am grateful to the social worker for getting the mother to take the GP letter, so that the GP can really clearly understand what the mother needs. I am grateful for the Guardian for setting out a list of things that she would seek for ST, a report from his nursery to update on his needs, the foster carer logs, the respite logs for ST, the contact notes, potential special guardian’s GP letter when she gets it, about [redacted condition] , and the witness statement from the mother and the father about the father’s return to the UK can be ordered now. 168. In relation to the father’s return from abroad, I am glad that Mr O’Brien has already drafted a police disclosure order that will tell us what they knew about that and when. 169. I have read the foster carer log entry of 21 September 2024, where QR tells the foster carer he went to the airport to collect his friend. I think that the advocates are right. We should gather the case notes and original primary documents relating to that entry and any other conversations that may be relevant in understanding when the father returned to the UK and what the mother and the boys knew about it and when. 170. I have already formally joined the prospective special guardian as a party. She is getting her GP to write a report when she meets the GP on 11 March 2025. I would like to set a deadline for the filing of that report of 25 March 2025. If there needs to be an application for an expert, because the GP does not have the expertise to understand the impact of [redacted condition], for example. 171. Any application needs to be made before the hearing on 2 April 2025, and if it can be agreed that something else is needed by way of expert instruction before then, of course, I would approve an application made on paper. 172. I am listing, therefore, on 4 March 2025 for an application to be made about police disclosure and to look at the Guardian’s involvement for ST and AB going forward. 173. I am listing on 2 April 2025, alongside AB’s case, at 3pm with attendance two hours before at 1pm. 174. I remind the Guardian and the social worker of their offer and obligation to obtain QR and OP’s wishes and feelings about AB and ST, so that I am fully informed of what they want and how they feel throughout their proceedings, and I would be grateful if both of them would take a responsibility for communicating the outcome of ST and AB’s proceedings to QR and OP who, after Tuesday, will lose the benefits of their independent Guardian and representation. 175. Therefore, subject to any further submissions, I make the following orders. I record that the threshold criteria in section 31 of the Children Act are met in the way reflected in the documents drafted for annexing to the order. 176. I approve the Local Authority’s care plan. I give the Local Authority seven days to update the care plans formally now that QR is at [name redacted] House, now that we have a plan for detailed therapeutic support for both the boys, so that those care plans reflect the contact schedule agreed at court. 177. The expectations document, which I think is a really clear and helpful document should also travel with the boys, as it were, as part of their care plan and, at an appropriate time, the social worker will no doubt sit with them and explain, although they have not signed up to that plan themselves, this is what the mother has signed up to and this is what they will be offered, and this is what needs to change before they could go home. 178. Particularly mindful of OP’s GCSEs this summer, if there is any extra support he needs by way of tutoring, I see that is already mentioned in the care plan, but in my view, it is imperative he is given it and if there are any reasonable adjustments he needs for the exam season, I trust that an application will be made on his behalf to the exam board before he gets to sit those exams. 179. Subsequently, I make a care order for both boys. It will be dated and sealed on 4 March 2025 to enable their representation next Tuesday. 180. I direct a transcript of this judgment be prepared and anonymised, and published in the usual way. 181. I give leave for relevant documentation to be disclosed to the mother’s treating clinicians and therapists, and QR’s treating clinicians and therapists. 182. I imagine that this judgment, Dr McGuire’s report for the boys and Dr Smith of the mother, would be useful to treating clinicians. 183. Also, I make the usual orders in relation to costs. 184. It would be neglectful of me in closing this judgment not to thank the many people who have worked very hard through the course of this week and, indeed, before that. I am really glad to hear that the social worker will remain the social worker for OP and QR at least until AB and ST’s proceedings are concluded, and I am really grateful for her clear communication with them, for the thought that she has given at court to that expectations document and support that they can have, and her commitment to making sure that their wishes and feelings are obtained and that they understand what happens at the end of the story, as it were, for ST and AB. 185. I thank too for the Guardian proactively offering to explore whether it would be appropriate for her to act as a Guardian for both AB and AT, and for OP and QR’s very careful report that she has prepared meticulously setting out how things look for them and what she thinks is best for them. 186. I want to thank the foster carers who cared for the older boys. I do not think that would always have been very easy, and I thank them for their commitment and service. 187. Also, I wish formal thanks too to be conveyed to the residential staff who helped set up that meeting with OP the other day and who are committed to the boys going forward. 188. I wish to thank counsel for the immense amount of hard work that I know has gone outside of this hearing. I can see from the documents that have been prepared, and the thought and care that has gone into them, that real careful consideration has been given to the best way forward in this case, and that expert guidance and assistance has been offered to the lay parties throughout this final hearing. 189. I thank Mr Fletcher who I know will not be here in the summer for his voice for OP. I hope it is possible to retain Mr Davies if his diary allows, but in case it does not, I record formal thanks to him for his service throughout a very long and difficult set of proceedings so far. 190. In addition, I thank Mr Barran, Mr Roberts and Mr O’Brien for their ongoing service to the Court, which I will be again grateful for when we resume at those future hearings. End of Judgment. Transcript of a recording by Acolad UK Ltd 291-299 Borough High Street, London SE1 1JG Tel: 020 7269 0370 legal@ubiqus.com Acolad UK Ltd hereby certify that the above is an accurate and complete record of the proceedings or part thereof. This transcript has been approved by the judge. 20