A child at the centre of controversial media reports regarding the appropriateness of her placement with Muslim foster carers has been placed in the interim care of her grandmother.
The Times claimed earlier this week that the “white Christian” child had been at times “very distressed” in her placement by Tower Hamlets Council with “Arabic-speaking” foster carers, and that a carer removed her necklace with a crucifix on it.
However, the council disputed some of the paper’s claims, and said the child was “in fact fostered by an English speaking family of mixed race”.
A court order published yesterday revealed that the child’s mother had “raised some concerns about the appropriateness of the placement”, and on 27 June the court directed Tower Hamlets to “produce a statement to address the cultural appropriateness of the foster care placement”.
‘No welfare concerns’
However, the child’s guardian, having visited the child in the foster carer’s home and spoken to the child alone, had “no concerns as to the child’s welfare and she reports that the child is settled and well cared for by the foster carer”.
The case management order, published by Judge Khatun Sapnara in the East London Family Court, also revealed that the mother had “at no stage applied to the court for a change of foster carer”. The mother also said that she “did not disclose documents, confidential to these proceedings, to the press”.
Judge Sapnara said the new care arrangements were “a result of the application of the relevant law to the evidence now available to the court and not as a result of any influence arising out of media reports”.
Providing some background to the case, her order said that the child, identified as AB, was removed from the mother’s care and placed by Tower Hamlets with foster carers on an emergency basis in March 2017, but “there was no culturally matched foster placement available at the time”. There was then a “temporary change” of foster carer in the summer so the original foster carer could go on holiday.
Interim care order
The child has been the subject of an interim care order to Tower Hamlets since 10 March, and has had supervised contact with the mother three times per week. She has also spent time with the grandmother and had weekly telephone contact with both the mother and grandmother. However, the child’s biological father has not been located.
The mother applied for the child to be placed in the care of the maternal grandmother at a hearing on 27 June. However, the court refused that application, as at that time “the full assessment of the grandmother as a safe and appropriate carer was not yet available”.
On 27 June the court listed the case for further hearing on 29 August, and the foster care placement (a respite placement while the original foster carer went on holiday) was due to end on that day.
On 15 August Tower Hamlets proposed a change in its care plan to enable the child to be placed with the maternal grandmother on 29 August. The grandmother had been positively assessed as a suitable special guardian for the child.
Mother opposes long-term care plan
Tower Hamlets proposes that the child remains in the care of the grandmother in the long term, but the mother opposes this.
The order added: “The arrangements for where and with whom the child shall live and what contact she should have with other family members will be decided by the court at a later stage at a final hearing.”
Documents provided to the court state that the child’s maternal grandparents “are of a Muslim background but are non practising”, though the child’s mother says they are of “Christian heritage”.
The grandmother now wishes to return to her country of origin and care for the child there. Judge Sapnara said this would “require steps to be taken to obtain appropriate orders in the courts in the grandmother’s country of origin”.
Tower Hamlets will “provide assistance to the maternal grandmother to enable her to remain in this country beyond her currently permitted stay in order to provide ongoing care to AB, until the finalisation of these proceedings”.
Tower Hamlets must also respond to additional allegations made by the mother at court this week and file a statement on 8 September.
The next hearing scheduled in the case is the adjourned issues resolution hearing on 2 October.
‘Best placement available’
Debbie Jones, corporate director of children’s services at Tower Hamlets, said the council had been working towards the placement of the child with a family member “for some time”.
She added: “As a local authority, our number one priority with foster care is ensuring a child is placed in a safe and loving environment.
“Our foster carers are qualified people from different backgrounds, with vast experience of looking after children. They represent the diverse make up of our borough which is a place where people of all backgrounds get on with one another.
“Once the decision was taken to place the child into temporary care, we had to find the best placement available at the time.
“While cultural background is always a significant consideration in making this decision, so too are other factors including remaining in the local area to promote contact with the child’s family and for the child to continue at the same school in order to give them as much stability as possible.”
Press complaints
Jones added: “We are disappointed with the tone of some of the media coverage especially given the judge’s comments yesterday that reporting has been intrusive for both the child and the foster carer.
“While we cannot go into details of a case that would identify a child in foster care, there are also inaccuracies in the reporting of it.
“For example, the child was in fact fostered by an English speaking family of mixed race. We would like to give more details but we are legally restricted from doing so.”
The Independent Press Standards Organisation, which regulates newspapers, has received 10 complaints about The Times’ coverage of the case and six concerning articles published by the Daily Mail. It will assess if there has been a breach of its code and if it should launch an investigation.
Register now for Community Care Live London for two days of free and essential learning to boost your CPD, sharpen your legal knowledge and improve your practice, on 26-27 September.
Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole 
Hampshire County Council 
Lincolnshire County Council 
Norfolk County Council 
Northamptonshire Children’s Trust 
South Gloucestershire Council 
Wiltshire Council 
Wokingham Borough Council 
Children and young people with SEND are ‘valued and prioritised’ in Wiltshire, find inspectors 
How specialist refugee teams benefit young people and social workers 
Podcast: returning to social work after becoming a first-time parent 
Podcast: would you work for an inadequate-rated service? 
Family help: one local authority’s experience of the model 
‘We are all one big family’: how one council has built a culture of support 
Workforce Insights – showcasing a selection of the sector’s top recruiters 
Facebook
X
LinkedIn
Instagram
Islamophobia and SW bashing all in one poisonous article.
The disinformation and lies in this article were so extreme the press regulator needs to act. The false allegations against the foster carers are so outrageous they could be libellous.
The once respectable Times has behaved worse than the lowest tabloid. Not only was the story grossly wrong, but they had the cheek to claim it was thanks to their coverage the child is now back with her family, event though Social Services had been working towards this for two weeks.
We are so used to Muslims (and Social Workers) being trashed in the press I fear we have grown to accept it. We must not do so.
This has been a travesty since day one. There would be an uproar if a Muslim child had been placed within a Christian family, indeed a recent news article reported how a young Muslim girl had been removed from a loving Christian family (that she loved living with) to be rehoused with a family of her own ethnicity and faith.
What they have now done is hand this child over to a grand parent that wants to “return to her country of origin” which apparently could be of Muslim faith according to documents supplied. So this poor child is going to be even further removed from her faith, her school, her friends and her support network!
As for the Tower Hamlets statement that the child had “in fact fostered by an English speaking family of mixed race” this is so ambiguous as to be meaningless. How well do the family speak English? Is it used in the household as a first language? Is the child excluded from conversations? What is the family mixture? Does it include English? Does Tower Hamlets really mean mixed ethnicity? As we all know there is one ONE race, the human race!
Really Andy, an uproar if a Muslim child had been placed with an Christian family? Either you are not a children’s Social Worker with any experience of the kinds of placements that are being offered to children in care or you are living in an environment where there is a huge number of Muslim foster carers for Muslim children.
I can think of numerous children who have been placed with families that do not reflect their religious or racial background and more often than not it is a Caribbean, African or Asian child who is either from a Muslim, Sikh or Hindu background that is being placed with a White Christian family. These families worked hard to provide culturally sensitive care, just as a Muslim foster carer would be expected to for a white Christian child.
Interesting to see what the reaction has been when it is a Christian child in a placement that is not matched to their racial, cultural or religious background is it not?
Whoa Andy, do you write for The Times?
“What they have done now is hand this child over to a grand parent that wants to return to her country of origin”
Just in case you hadn’t noticed it is the courts who decide and Mother requested that them child be placed with them.
Every report or comment on this story seems to muddy the waters further. We will never know and should never know the full story but the need to vilify the press and reporters is clouding some of the issues.
The negative comments reported surrounding homelife seem to relate to the initial placement that lasted 4 months. The distress apparently shown by the child would appear to have been documented by the family resource worker. The original foster carers went on holiday never to return so it seems as the respite placement with the mixed race (could mean anything) family has lasted two months. These two placements have, either for the convenience of the story or slack journalism, merged into one and, possibly for the council’s convenience, the suitability of the second placement has obscured any issues surrounding the first one.
The clamour to totally disregard the story which was a lesson in unbalanced, agenda fulfilling propaganda, has washed over the fact that the first placement may have been unsuitable and the child may have been genuinely distressed. If we are quick to highlight the lack of resources in children’s services, shortages of social workers etc then we have to be honest and acknowledge that local authorities may be lowering the bar in the recruitment, training and supervision of foster carers.
I am white British. I have fostered Muslim children. I have had no specific training for this as none has ever been available to me but have sought guidance from friends who are Muslim foster carers. Had I met all the needs that they are entitled to? Probably not to the extent that my Muslim friends would have but, in a city that is 25% Muslim, I have been the only foster carer available to the children at the time.
This is due to poor recruitment, woeful retention and senseless cuts to fees and allowances at a time when there is an an increase in demand.