England and Wales Magistrates' Court (Family)

X Local Authority

Applicant

and

Miss A

1^st Respondent

(a child)

2^nd Respondent

Mrs X

for the

Applicant

Mr Y

for the

1st Respondent

Miss Z

for the

2^nd Respondent

1.

These are Care Proceedings brought by X Local Authority in respect of C age 1 year, and if the threshold is met the court is invited to make a Special Guardianship Order.

2.

The mother of C is A, she was represented by Mr Y although he was removed from the record 22 March 2010 due to a lack of instructions. The father B is not a party although he is aware of these proceedings. B has not played any part in the proceedings, but has informed the social worker and the guardian that he is in agreement with C being cared for by his daughter D.

3.

A has not had any contact with C since June 2009. B has not had any contact with C. C has also not had any contact with his half siblings who have all been adopted.

4.

We have read the documentary evidence filed and heard representations from the Local Authority and the solicitor for the child. There have been Care Proceedings in relation to A’s previous three children who were removed from her care due to her drug misuse, its impact on her lifestyle and her inability to provide adequate care to her children as well as her unwillingness to co-operate with professionals.

5.

The Local Authority has filed a schedule of findings dated 2 June 2010 at pages 3-5 of the bundle. No response has been filed to this schedule.

6.

On the basis of the evidence we are satisfied that C has suffered and was likely to suffer significant harm being attributable to the care given to him not what it would be reasonable to expect a parent to give a child in satisfaction of the threshold criteria pursuant to section 31 of the Children Act 1989, as set out in the schedule of findings.

7.

We have considered the final analysis and recommendation of the Children’s Guardian and we adopt the welfare checklist contained in her report.

8.

The courts range of powers in this case includes no order, a Supervision Order and a Care Order. We also have power to make a Special Guardianship Order.

9.

Considering the need for an order, we must start from the point that the court should not intervene in the life of children and families unless it is necessary to do so We must also have regard to the Human rights Act, in particular that orders are necessary and proportionate to safeguard C’s welfare.

10.

C’s welfare demands that appropriate plans are made for his future at this time. Given A’s lack of involvement in these proceedings as well as failing to respond to communications from the social workers, we take the view that the Care Plan advocating the making of a Special guardianship Order in favour of D is entirely the appropriate order in the circumstances. This is fully supported by father and the Children’s guardian. We agree that contact between C and his birth parents should be at the discretion of D.

11.

Accordingly we endorse the Local Authority Care Plan dated 10 June 2010 (CP4-8 of the bundle) and make a Special Guardianship Order in respect of C in favour of D.

12.

D has requested that C’s name be changed to Z. B has given his consent to this, as set out at E2. A has failed to respond to the letters sent to her concerning a change of name dated 23 July 2010 and 24 August 2010 at E3-4 and E5. However, we are satisfied that she will have received them as they are directed to her mother’s address and her mother has indicated to the social worker that she has received previous correspondence. The Guardian supports the change of name.

13.

In making the Special Guardianship Order, we agree that it is in C’s best interests to have his name changed to Z, and accordingly we make that order as well.