News

The government has been urged to clarify the law on funding fostering placements, after a long-running dispute over London authorities "offloading" vulnerable young people on to other social services departments resurfaced in the High Court last week.

Caught up in the current row are two teenagers, originally taken into care by the London Boroughs of Lambeth and Hammersmith & Fulham, but who have been living in Kent for the past six years.

The councils claim that since the teenagers have reached the age of 18, the London authorities are no longer legally required to fund their care. Kent Council, however, insists it has no legal duty to provide care for the teenagers as they are "ordinarily resident in London".

Both the teenagers have complicated and expensive care needs. One, a 19-year-old girl, has been looked after by Hammersmith & Fulham council since May 1987 but has been living with foster parents in the Sittingbourne area of Kent since 1983.

Stephen Cobb, representing the teenagers, told the court that the girl would need "a substantial degree of practical and emotional help throughout her adulthood".

Although her foster parents are devoted and offered unfailing support they do not have the resources to care for her and ensure her entitlements to benefits without proper funding and professional support, said Cobb.

The other, an 18-year-old boy with a congenital disability, has lived in Margate for the past six years. He was cared for by his parents until aged eight before being placed with Lambeth social services department. The annual cost of his care is estimated at more than £70,000.

Cobb told the court the case raised important questions in relation to the provision of care services for young adults with special needs. "The first issue is where does responsibility lie for the provision of services to a young adult leaving care when he or she has been looked after by one authority as a child but, when leaving care, is living in the area of another authority?"

Robin Allen, representing Kent Council, urged Mr Justice Latham not to intervene in the dispute which he said was "more appropriate for resolution by the Social Security Secretary".

The case echoes a previous court battle in which 18-year-old care leaver David Caddell took action against Lambeth Council over claims that it had failed to provide him with help to live independently.

At the age of 13, Lambeth had placed Caddell with a foster carer in Kent. In June 1997 the High Court subsequently ruled that Kent social services department was responsible for Caddell's after-care.

The current legal situation required urgent clarification, said Pat Verity, deputy director of the National Foster Care Association. "The problem is that the system was not set up with the idea that children would be placed so far from home," she said.

"It was assumed there would be tit-for-tat arrangements. But it is highly unlikely that Kent will be placing many children with foster parents in Lambeth. Morally I think that responsibility should remain with those authorities which originally take the children into care."

A Kent Council spokesperson said this is the first opportunity the local authority has had to challenge the Caddell decision which it believes is at odds with the Children Act 1989 which advocates support for young care leavers up to the age of 21.

"There are now more than 870 young people in care placed by other authorities in Kent which we know about. If we are going to become responsible for all these young people when they reach the age of 18, the financial implications are really big."