News

Family law experts have slammed a newspaper for reporting that children are being taken into care because their parents are too poor to look after them.

The Daily Mail story was based on government figures stating that low income was the main reason for 110 children being looked after by local authorities at the end of March 2004.

But Liz Goldthorpe, chair of the Association of Lawyers for Children, said low income would never be grounds for children to be compulsorily removed from their parents. The law states that this can only happen if they are suffering, or are at risk of, significant harm.


Alison Paddle, chair of Nagalro, the professional association representing guardians, said family courts would stop cases from going any further if low income was the only reason for children to be removed.

A Department for Education and Skills spokesperson said the figure included children who were voluntarily placed in local authority care. She said no child would be taken into care solely on the basis that their parents didn't have enough money.

She also rejected claims in the Mail, from pressure group the Families Anti-Social Services Inquiry Team, that the government's target to increase adoptions was leading to children being taken into care.