John Hemming’s allegations that social workers are
unnecessarily taking children into care to meet adoption targets
has caused outrage across the sector. Campaigners have described
them as unacceptable and dangerous and fear that they will damage
the public’s view of social work.
Hemming, however, argues that he is highlighting
miscarriages of justice and is right to expose what he sees as
serious flaws in the care system.
The crux of Hemming’s
argument is that financial incentives behind adoption targets are
spurring councils to incorrectly take into care healthy white
babies – who he argues are the most easily adoptable (see
“
The targets in question”). He says it is not helpful to focus
on specific targets as these change over time.
Ann Baxter, chair of the Association of Directors
of Children’s Services health, care and additional needs policy
committee, says Hemming’s argument involves accepting “there’s a
huge conspiracy involving large numbers of professionals and lay
people all because a council can get an additional bit of
grant”.
The family courts, the Children and Family Court Advisory and
Support Service and lay adoption panel members play a role in
deciding whether children should be taken into care or adopted –
not just councils. Baxter says: “We refute Hemming’s perspective.
It doesn’t add up.”
David Holmes, chief executive at British Association for Adoption
and Fostering, agrees. He says care and adoption decisions are
subject to intensive scrutiny. He adds: “The impression he gives is
that it’s possible to take a decision about adopting a child in
about two minutes.”
Just
one of more than 50 front-line professionals who sent responses to
Community Care said they felt under pressure to take
children into care due to adoption targets, and some said they were
unaware of their existence.
Most criticised Hemming’s views, with some saying social workers
were often unable to have children taken into care if they felt
they were at risk. However, a few backed his views, including two
who felt that some groups of parents, such as those with physical
or learning disabilities, were treated unfairly.
Hemming says he has
encountered a number of cases where parents have had their children
unfairly taken into care. He also says he has also personally
experienced social workers fabricating evidence about his own
personal life. He also cites the sharp rise in the number of
children under five adopted or taken into care from 1995 to 2006 in
England (see
“
From care to adoption”) and says similar trends do exist among
older children.
Government figures also show that the number of
children adopted who were younger than one month when they were
taken into care in 2006 in England was more than double that in
1995.
Hemming’s interpretation of the statistics does not
wash with campaigners. They argue that research has shown adoption
to be a positive outcome for many children, and that it is
therefore right that more children in care have been adopted.
In 2000, the government introduced a national
target to increase the number of children adopted from care by at
least 40% between 1999-2000 and 2004-5; by 2005-6, adoptions had
risen by 37%. Baxter says the target was partly responsible for the
rise and was a positive move as in the early 1990s too many
children were languishing in care. “There were concerns that the
balance [between parents’ rights and children’s’ rights] had been
shifted and children were waiting too long.”
Increased alcohol and drug addiction among parents has also
contributed to the rise, says Jonathan Pearce, director of Adoption
UK. “Traditionally, few healthy white babies came into the care
system. The increase is often due to children being moved at birth
or soon after where they are born into families who can’t look
after them due to drink or drug abuse.”
Hemming says he has seen “no evidence” to support
this view.
The campaigners argue that the increase is also down to more being
known about child development and the importance of what happens to
babies in their early months.
Holmes points out that, although adoptions have
risen, it is from a low base and they represent a small proportion
of the English care population: 5% in 1999-2000 and 6% in 2005-6.
He adds that adoption is a slow process, with government figures
for England showing that the average time between when under-ones
come into care and when they are adopted is two years and one
month.
There is a shortage of people coming forward to be
adoptive parents and campaigners say that Hemming’s allegations
could exacerbate this, which the MP acknowledges.
Many of the front-line professionals who commented said Hemming’s
views would reinforce the ill-informed image of social workers as
child snatchers. Baxter says they could also be dangerous for
children.
She says: “Allegations like this bring the system
into disrepute. He might be putting people off raising concerns
about a child’s welfare and children might be put at risk.” Hemming
describes this as “nonsense”.
For Holmes, Hemming is laying into a system of high quality,
something that must not get lost in his allegations. “We have a
good child protection system and a good care system and we must not
scare the public into not having any confidence in the system,” he
says.
THE TARGETS IN QUESTION
(
back)
Local area
agreements/local public service agreements
Sixty-one councils have local area agreements or local public
service agreements which feature a target on adoption and/or
stability of placements for looked-after children. Councils receive
financial rewards if they meet these targets.
LAAs have been piloted over the past two years and
LPSAs ended in March, when they were largely merged into LAAs. In
2008 all 150 councils in England will sign new three-year LAAs
which may include a target on adoption. Rewards are unlikely to be
given out for meeting specific targets under the new agreements,
though LAAs will contain broad incentives to meet targets.
Each LAA will be based on a set of 53 national
targets drawn from a list of 200 measures which will be published
this autumn. A target on the proportion of looked-after children
adopted has been proposed for inclusion by the DCSF. Councils and
their partners will negotiate whether to include this target in
their LAA with the government, which should depend on local needs
and existing performance.
Local partners can also add their own local targets
but need not report on them to the government.
Performance indicators
Councils have faced a performance indicator on the
proportion of looked-after children adopted in their annual
performance assessment framework since 1998. The indicator feeds
into councils’ annual performance assessment for children’s
services.
Although councils do not receive a direct financial
reward for doing well on performance indicators, Hemming says there
is still is still a financial incentive, as a higher APA score
leads to more financial freedoms from central government.
FROM CARE TO ADOPTION IN ENGLAND
(
back)
● 2,490 under-fives in
care were adopted in 2006, up from 1,010 in 1995.
● 4,160 under-fives were first taken
into care in 2006, up from 2,870 in 1995.
● 1,300 babies aged younger than a
month when they were taken into care were adopted in 2006, up from
540 in 1995.
● The average age at adoption in 2006
was four years and one month.
● 3,700 children were adopted from
care in 2006, up from 2,700 in 2000.
Source: DCSF
Further information
Adoption and
Fostering
Cafcass chief executive Anthony Douglas gives his
perspective
John Hemmings responds
Contact the author
Amy Taylor
This article appeared in the 2 August issue
under the headline "Miscarriages of justice or conspiracy
theory?"