Recently in family courts Category

As you will no doubt already know, the government is poised to publish a national adoption action plan to dismantle the current "bloated" system and replace it with a new set of duties, guidelines and - as some have already warned - pressures.

So what do you think? Has the government got the right approach or are ministers "romanticising adoption" and going for an easy public win on a complex issue? It is generally agreed that adoption processes need to be improved, but what do you think needs to change?

Are you a children's social worker with views about how the adoption changes will affect your job and the outcomes you can achieve for children? 

Do you have any concerns? Or are things moving in the right direction? Whatever your views, have your say by taking a few minutes to complete this (entirely anonymous) survey. Thanks.

Junior family lawyers are being forced to handle 'life and death' child care cases because of the rise in care applications, jeopardising children's access to justice, according to this interesting story in the Law Society Gazette today.

Naomi Angell, co-chair of the Law Society's family law committee, told the publication that law firms have responded to increased workloads by reorganising their practices so junior staff are helping with case preparation.

She warned: "Are junior staff equipped to make difficult decisions where there are alcohol, drug or mental health issues? Can they persuade a mother in an abusive relationship to choose between her partner or her children? Are they trained to make decisions that could mean the difference between life and death? I think not."

Barbara Hopkin, of the Association of Lawyers for Children, said the current situation was unsustainable. "The rising number of care applications means an unlimited source of work for those firms who can afford to do it.

"We all took a 10% cut in civil legal aid fees in October 2011, which led to some firms going out of business or just giving up publicly funded work. Those of us who are left are expected to do more work for less money, which is no incentive for future generations of lawyers to work in this area of law. The situation is unsustainable," she said.

Is this impacting on children's guardians working in tandem with lawyers on care cases? If you have a view on this, have your say on CareSpace.

Picture credit: katerha

by Dr Lucy Rai, senior social work lecturer at the Open University

The final episode of the BBC series Protecting Our Children, I want my baby back, showed three families facing the possibility of separation from their children for very different reasons.

A race against time

In the first case, we saw mum Louise trying to overcome a drug addiction so she could resume care of her baby, Mercedes.

Underlying the work with Louise was the ticking clock of her baby's developmental needs, set against her own timetable of addiction recovery. The priority was to provide Mercedes with a permanent, stable parent figure before she reached an age where changes in carers could forever harm her ability to form secure attachments.

Sadly this left Louise with very little time to achieve some momentous tasks: beating her drug addiction, withdrawing from methadone and completing a residential detox programme. Like Tiffany, the mother in episode one, Louise demonstrated real love for her baby by recognising that she was unable to meet her baby's needs in the time available.

More harsh decisions?

In the second case, we followed a mother who was failing to protect her baby from a known paedophile who shared the care of the child.

Despite clear evidence of the risk to the baby, there was a total lack of cooperation from the mother. Although there was no medical evidence of sexual abuse, the child showed worrying behaviour - such as obvious distress when having his nappy changed and being overly familiar with strangers - which indicated sexual abuse.

We saw the baby being removed by a social worker, with support from the police. This may have seemed dreadfully harsh but it is very unusual, as the team manager explained. Sexual abuse is a difficult area to respond to, and with less clear evidence of immediate risk it is normal to proceed slowly.

Multi-agency support at a time of crisis

The third case followed a mother who needed support to provide a safe, sanitary home so she and her seven-year-old daughter could be reunited.

We saw the intensive resources that can be arranged to help a parent in crisis. We saw social services, housing and environmental health workers working collaboratively to empower the mother to regain control of her home and realise her parenting capabilities.

The level of risk was very different in this case, because the child was older and the mother had been a good parent but was struggling during a personal crisis.

Child development

All three cases showed that social workers need to have a sophisticated understanding of child development. Mercedes needed quick decisions to meet her need for a secure home before she was a year old. The daughter in the 'dirty house' had both physical and emotional needs for a safe and clean home. The risk to the baby boy was heightened by observations about his behaviour - concerning behaviour in such a young child suggested his attachments were not secure and there may have been multiple, inconsistent carers in his life.

Child development plays a significant part in the education of social workers, and this programme exemplified well why this continues to be so important.

• The Open University has put together a range of resources to accompany Protecting our Children: www.open.edu/openlearn/startyourday

Nushra Mansuri, professional officer for the British Association of Social Workers, on why she believes the government's plans for a six-month time limit on care cases are "nonsensical" and likely to set social workers up to fail.

The government's response to the family justice review recognises (on page six) that the current system is "under strain" with substantial increases in case volumes - a 10% increase in public law cases over a 12 month period and a doubling of cases since 2008.

It is therefore incredulous that, in a climate of austerity where the mantra is 'more for less', we are expecting an already overstretched and beleaguered workforce to somehow work miracles in reducing delays in cases. It is nonsensical. But worse than that, this will set practitioners up to fail and will lead to more children being let down rather than protected.

It also seems a million miles away from the Munro report which espouses a learning culture, as opposed to a blame culture, and the removal of arbitrary and unnecessary targets that curtail practice rather than empower it to effect positive change.

This is not good news for the social work profession where people are already working around the clock to do the best job they can in difficult circumstances. Even the chair of the review panel David Norgrove said, in one of the regional seminars, that he recognised things were going to get worse before they get better. That's a powerful statement.

Norgrove also repeated the government's promise of there being no more money in the light of any reviews and we know the current agenda is all about so-called 'efficiencies'. Efficient for who I wonder? I am not aware of children being the beneficiaries of such measures. 

The trend for government consultations is to carry out impact assessments. I would like to know if anyone has sat down and counted the cost of these proposals to some of the most vulnerable children in the country.

Perhaps it is poignant, that this week we celebrated the bi-centenary year of Charles Dickens' birth. If he was alive today, what would one of this country's greatest campaigners for children's rights make of such reforms? Reach for his quill no doubt and offer some social commentary to this sad state of affairs.

Annie Semphill, the social worker seen in Monday's episode of Protecting Our Children, responds to comments and questions from viewers, including those who took part in Community Care's live panel debate.

I couldn't quite bring myself to read all the reaction online as the programme was aired, but I got a good choice selection from my husband throughout the evening.

I feel really honoured by the praise and appreciation shown for our work, but we were really just doing our jobs. I'd like to share some of the warm words that were posted online with all the social workers in Bristol. It was very encouraging, if also a bit embarrassing.

One of the surprising areas of interest was a fascination with the security guards who accompanied me on visits to Shaun and Marva. Because of our long history with the couple I knew Shaun could be unpredictable with a tendency for violence. It did make me feel safe to have two large uniformed men standing behind me as I approached their front door.

I was less worried by the dog as I felt Shaun could keep control of him and wouldn't risk using him in a dangerous way.

Many Community Care readers wondered why I was off sick towards the end of the case, shown in the film, and asked if this was because of the emotional burden the case had on me. I wasn't off due to stress - I had quite a serious virus - but I think the case did exhaust me and made my recovery longer than it might otherwise have been.

I think the film successfully showed the supportive atmosphere in which I was working. Emotional turmoil comes with the territory when you're a social worker but I did feel it more in this case. We'd had such a long involvement with Marva and I really did have some cautious hope for her this time as the experience of dealing with the family had improved enormously.

There was much legal discussion behind the scenes on this case. It might not have been the focus of the programme, but there was a lot of preparation with colleagues to ensure that if we did need to move to care proceedings it could be done smoothly without delays.

The BBC filmed with me, Arthur, Shaun, Marva and all the other supporting colleagues for a good seven months to produce an hour's worth of television. I think it did convey the complexity of the decisions involved and was emotionally sympathetic - both to my profession and Shaun and Marva.

I am heartened to see the number of comments from social work students online who are now further encouraged to qualify.

• The final episode of Protecting Our Children is on Monday Feb 13, BBC2, 9pm. 

Last night's episode of the BBC series Protecting Our Children seemed to provoke an even more positive online reaction than the first - even winning over some of the first film's critics.

In particular, there was huge praise on Twitter and our live debate for the empathetic and calm-headed approach of social worker Annie (pictured) - seen supporting young couple Shaun and Marva during their fourth pregnancy - and her manager Arthur.

There was animated discussion, and some amusement, at the sight of Annie flanked by two burly security guards during home visits. (The security guards, like the social workers, were employed by Bristol Council for all the viewers who asked last night).

There was debate around the role of adult services in child protection cases, to support parents with mental health and substance misuse problems - as we saw last night. And of course there was the all-important question of whether the series will improve the public perception of social work. (Most viewers said they were hopeful but not quite convinced yet.)

Here's a quick round-up of views, thoughts and reflections from the web (more to follow soon):

@VjLupton (via Twitter)
Even more sure I'm doing right by getting my degree after #protectingourchildren amazing people making a difference.

@CathyAshley Family Rights Group (via Twitter)
Very moving #protectingourchildren. Sympathetic portrayal of all involved. Complete respect for social worker & her manager.

@mwilliamsthomas (via Twitter)
Half way through prog- very impressed so far - Annie a credit to the profession @ComCareChildren #protectingourchildren"

@mrspentleton (via Twitter)
#protectingourchildren. Massive respect 2 the SW. Massive respect 2 the foster carer. Everyone should watch this. Pay attention media!

@SteveDonnan (via Twitter)
Social workers get such a bad rap, I think they do an incredibly difficult and dangerous job. Takes great strength #protectingourchildren

@BASW_UK British Association of Social Workers (via Twitter)
Social worker showing great resilience & empathy, lets hope her other 14 cases are not as challenging!

And you can replay our debate from last night here: 

by Dr Lucy Rai, senior social work lecturer at the Open University

In the second episode of the BBC series Protecting Our Children we followed the pregnancy of a young couple, Marva and Shaun.

The pair had already had three babies removed from them and posed a significant risk to their unborn child, due to their chaotic lifestyle and severe alcohol abuse. We saw Annie, their social worker, trying to engage with them to minimise the harm to their unborn child. This episode also provides a number of valuable lessons for social work.

Assessing the safety of an unborn child

The risk to Marva and Shaun's baby began before birth. The level of alcohol Marva was drinking, together with her overdoses and lack of personal care, placed the unborn baby at considerable risk. Intervention at this stage could only focus on supporting Marva to prioritise her health and self care, which was no easy task when her self-harming behaviour was driven by depression and her relationship with Shaun.

Meeting the needs of children is so often only possible through meeting the needs of parents. Marva came heartbreakingly close to letting go of her destructive relationship with Shaun in order to prioritise her own health and that of her baby.

Managing emotional work

Last night's episode illustrated very poignantly that recognising and working with emotions is a central part of social work. As Annie said at the end of the programme, the time to stop working in child protection is when you stop feeling.

Annie could only build a working relationship with Shaun and Marva by acknowledging their feelings of loss, anger and anxiety. Arthur, Annie's team manager, also showed during supervision how important it was for Annie to express her changing feelings about the work.

The pain in this story, tempered only with occasional moments of hope and exhilaration, provides an important lesson about the importance of keeping feelings at the centre of good social work practice.

Harsh decisions

The decision to separate Marva from her baby affected everyone involved in the case profoundly. It illustrated the kind of social work recommendations that keep children alive.

Responsibility for such decisions remains with the court. In this case, the court will have taken into account the vulnerability of such a tiny baby and the level of risk posed by the child being in the sole care of parents with a history of extreme alcohol misuse, overdoses and, in Shaun's case, violence.

In this context, to wait until harm has actually taken place may well be too late.

• The Open University co-produced Protecting Our Children, in partnership with the BBC. Dr Rai provided expert input into the development of the series.

The government has finally published its formal response to David Norgrove's family justice review - and it's not without controversy.

Although it accepts almost all the review's recommendations, Norgrove has already criticised the government's announcement on shared parenting following divorce or separation. (He said don't do it. Ministers look like they might.)

For social workers and children's guardians, the biggest news is probably the confirmation that the government will introduce a statutory six-month limit on care cases by 2013. (But this shouldn't come as a huge surprise given the government's position on this back in November.)

Those I've spoken to have mixed feelings about the deadline. Some feel confident it will speed up decisions and reduce delay (some children wait 55 weeks for their case to be completed), while others are adamant the deadline will only heap more pressure on a struggling system.

One guardian said: "We could see some poor practice if people are just desperately trying to meet deadlines." Nushra Mansuri, professional officer at the British Association of Social Workers, previously told me: "It won't help reduce delay. Most social workers don't have the resources to complete care cases in six months so this could just be setting them up to fail."

Barnardo's chief Anne Marie Carrie said the deadline would reduce delay, but acknowledged the difficulties of meeting it. "We must not underestimate the challenge in achieving this, with record numbers of care applications having been received in the last half of 2011," she said.

Maggie Atkinson, children's commissioner for England, said she recognised the challenge "in ensuring that all essential evidence is placed before the court within this timeframe".

• The government also announced plans to implement the review's recommendation for a co-ordinated family justice system, including a single family court across England and Wales, and a Family Justice Board.
 
• Family courts body Cafcass will move from the Department for Education into the Ministry of Justice by 2015, to "bring court social work functions closer to the court process". And courts will be expected to rely less upon expert evidence - another controversial reform.