Society must guard against unnecessary state intervention in family life. Family Courts are presented with difficult legal dilemmas in public law cases. They reach decisions on the standard of 'the balance of probabilities' and underpinned by the legal requirement to serve the best interests of the child. It is inevitable that this process will cause some family members to experience a deep sense of injustice even when all parties involved have done their best to ascertain the truth.

Social workers have a pivotal role in care proceedings and many are committed to working effectively to achieve conflict resolution outside the court process. The role of the court should therefore be minimal; it scrutinises the evidence presented by social workers and acts as safeguard for parents against unlawful, or unfair, social work practice. In a number of well-publicised cases judges have rejected local authority recommendations after being presented with poor quality social work assessments and flawed evidence. The profession must recognise that these mistakes are serious and need a carefully considered response. It should insist that only social workers with approved training should carry out this kind of court work.

The Adoption Leadership Board issued a guide here with the aim of clarifying decision-making in care proceedings where adoption against the parents' wishes is being considered. It is very helpful and strikes the right balance between meeting the child's need for decisiveness in care planning and the parents' needs for justice. Unfortunately, this has not generated the necessary debate within the social work profession. It is a sign of the uneasy relationship between social work and the law.

There is an urgent need for greater clarity about the social work role in care proceedings. The knowledge base has become so weak and fragmented that it is difficult to find any practical guidance on how social workers can prepare themselves for this role. Lack of role clarity is a major contributor to stress in social work. Furthermore, social work expertise in legal matters is not sufficiently developed and integrated into practice.

Family courts require social work reports of a high professional standard if they are to function properly. Poor standards are totally unacceptable because decisions are often made that have profound and irrevocable effects on the lives of those involved. Recently, the most senior family court judge has criticised social workers for their 'sloppy practice' and the 'recurrent inadequacy of analysis' revealed in court reports. He has also criticised local authorities for their non-compliance with orders made by the family courts. Clearly, standards of social work practice must be raised.

Essentially, social workers need a sound grasp of the forensic approach required of them. They also need relevant experience and a capacity to think for themselves if they are to make good assessments of complex family situations and produce reports that are useful in ensuring courts reach fair and balanced judgements.

In addition, social workers need a coherent model of practice which enables them to make sense of the key role they perform. Without this it can be difficult for them to work effectively to achieve their underlying aims of problem-solving and reaching decisions based on sound reasoning and natural justice.

Justice and Basic Human Rights

Social workers have a crucial role to play in protecting the rights of individuals. They are required to bring their knowledge and skills to consideration of some of the most challenging family situations and complex risks for children. During the course of their work they reach decisions with and on behalf of individuals within complicated legal frameworks, balancing and protecting the rights of children, their parents and other family members.

The question of whether the threshold of significant harm to a child has been met is a central consideration during care proceedings. Only if the threshold has been crossed are there grounds for making a full care order. Social workers have to bring together any evidence that significant harm has occurred (or their reasons for thinking there is a serious risk that significant harm will be suffered in the future) and if the court finds the threshold has been crossed 'on the balance of probabilities' it then has to consider whether an order can be justified on 'welfare grounds'.

An example of a case where significant harm was suspected but unproven was that of Ashya King. Fortunately, the High Court soon recognised, when more information emerged, that the controls provided by Wardship were not required and quickly dropped them. In this case the threshold that Ashya was at risk of significant harm had never been met. With the benefit of hindsight it seems that social workers could have been more assertive in checking out whether Ashya was at risk of significant harm before going to court.

Some legal decisions may seem to conflict with social work values - such as the decision to remove a new-born baby at birth without giving notice to the mother. However, this is a relatively unusual step and the court would normally require a pre-birth assessment and a medical opinion before issuing an order.

When a child is removed by means of a compulsory order it is in the interests of both the child and parents that matters are resolved as quickly as possible. Very often a lack of parental co-operation is regarded as suspicious when, in fact, it may be a reasonable response to heavy-handed social work intervention. It is much better if matters can be resolved quickly and informally. Local authorities need to improve the way they deal with complaints in order to resolve disputes with parents without the need for lengthy legal challenges.

Crisis Intervention

When parents are formally notified that the local authority is about to commence care proceedings they invariably experience a sense of crisis. Those parents who have been involved in ongoing work with social workers are given a stark reminder of the imbalance of power between them and social workers. Other parents who have had little or no previous social work involvement will naturally feel a sense of shock and disbelief. In some cases, matters can be dealt with in a relatively short period of time - an interim order is allowed to lapse and no further legal action is taken. In others, where a full care order is obtained, there is a 26 week time limit on proceedings - which is usually not unreasonable.

It is almost inevitable that social workers find themselves working in a hostile climate much of the time. However, parents in crisis will sometimes become more amenable to facing up to their problems and thinking about the possibility of change. Intensive, brief and focused support, when parents are motivated, can sometimes produce more effective change than long-term work where motivation and emotional engagement may be lacking.

The establishing of a collaborative working relationship between the social worker and parents is the aim, although this can be fraught with difficulties. Advocates of this approach believe that it may open up more understanding and discussion and enable the parents, and their wider family, to come up with solutions for themselves.

Essentially, the social worker needs skills in saying things to parents that may be difficult for them to hear. An understanding approach and an openness to the possibility that new evidence may emerge has to be combined with firmness and honesty. It is important that the social worker explains clearly the initial concerns and is willing to explore how these might be addressed in the future.

Assessment

Following the making of an initial order an assessment has to be carried out to determine whether there are grounds for a full care order, or supervision order, or no order at all. While proceedings are under way the local authority also has responsibility for making care plans for the child - and the possibility of placing the child within the extended family should be explored. The care plan usually includes arrangements for contact between children and parents. Information about the extent of parental co-operation with contact arrangements and observations of the nature of the interaction between parents and children will obviously contribute to the assessment.

Establishing significant harm is only one part of a complex process of assessment and decision making about a child. In most cases social workers have a considerable amount of background information from their own agency records. Sometimes, it may be necessary to obtain further information from another local authority, particularly where safeguarding concerns have arisen before. Information will also be available from other professionals involved with the family. Nevertheless, it is important that the social worker takes a fresh look at the circumstances in the family and is committed to obtaining information directly and forming a detailed and balanced analysis of the whole situation.

In many cases social work intervention with the family has been ongoing and has already moved up the tariff from informal support work to formal child protection measures, such as a child protection plan. Care proceedings are sometimes triggered in response to medical evidence of abuse or neglect or police inquiries, possibly leading to criminal charges.

Risk assessment is an ongoing process based on evidence gathered from working with the family over a period of time. During the assessment there are two different types of evidence that need to be considered. One is the single incident which raises suspicions of physical or sexual abuse. The other includes the full range of inter-connected evidence of neglect or emotional abuse arising out of a continuing pattern of poor parenting.

In addition the social worker has prime responsibility for gathering evidence about the child's developmental needs and the capacity of the family to improve the way it meets the child's basic care needs. A sound knowledge of normal child development is vital. The social worker should interview family members on their own to obtain clarification of the family circumstances i.e. details of any difficulties in the child's development, how the parents manage these difficulties and information about each member of the household and the family dynamics. Standardised assessments can be carried out but, equally important, is the need for consultation with colleagues, such as senior practitioners and managers, who can enable the social worker to reach a balanced professional judgement.

It is good practice for the social worker to spend time with the child in a way which enables the child's wishes and feelings to be understood and given due weight. If it emerges that it would be unsafe for the child to live with the parents, or the child conveys uncertainties about returning home after being in care, assessment may then focus on developing the Care Plan. Ideas from attachment theory are central in planning for a child's welfare needs and theories about the child's developing sense of 'Self' and belonging are also useful. Although an assessment of members of the extended family as possible carers may have to be considered this should be balanced against the need to avoid delay in planning for the child's future.

Analysis and Decision Making

The multi-agency approach of the child protection conference provides the necessary objectivity and balance to thinking about how a case should be progressed and this is where important decisions are made. Senior managers are responsible for keeping an over-view of the situation and making the final decision.

Creative thinking may be necessary in cases where professionals have every reason to suspect abuse but there is parental denial. The child who has clearly suffered abuse or neglect cannot wait for parents to change and adoption may well be the best option. However, much depends on whether there are any other concerns about the family and whether parents have the ability to reflect on their own adverse experiences and a commitment to improving their functioning as parents. Skilled social work intervention may enable the child to return home with the support of a multi-agency Protection Plan. Nevertheless, this approach tends to make heavy demands on social work time in the short-term and may also keep the family dependent on support services in the long-term.

Careful attention should be given to the full extent of the child's emotional and behavioural problems when adoption is being considered. It must be recognised that some children have problems which are so challenging they may be un-adoptable and the decision to pursue other arrangements, such as long-term fostering, may be more realistic.

During care proceedings the social worker is involved in an ongoing process of information-gathering, reflection and analysis which must draw on the expertise of other professionals. Sometimes conclusions are reached quickly due to the strength of the evidence and recognition that a care order is necessary. More often the situation is less clear-cut and thinking reflects humanistic values and pragmatic notions of what is in the best interests of the child and the family. The final local authority decision is made by the Agency Decision Maker. The social work report and recommendation to the court should be informed by consideration of all the evidence available and well-reasoned analysis. It is only in the most extreme circumstances that a non-consensual adoption will be recommended.

Conclusion

In children's services nothing could be more important than making sound decisions in care proceedings and meeting children's needs for stable and lasting relationships with caring adults. Social workers need to bring the necessary depth, rigour and analysis to the task of assessment and care planning and maintain a humane and respectful approach to parents.

Child protection can only function well if there is sufficient public trust and confidence in the system. At present some campaigning groups are alleging that the system is broken and babies are being taken from good homes by local authorities in order to meet 'adoption targets' - although the courts would probably not allow such an obvious miscarriage of justice.

Children's Services is facing enormous pressures. The social work profession often appears to display a siege mentality, unable to engage with genuine public concerns, and this sometimes raises questions about its claim to professional status. Unless social workers are properly trained and supported in their work for the family court their standards of practice may fall below an acceptable level and public trust and confidence in them will suffer. It is time for the profession to get to grips with tackling these important practice issues.

Hilary Searing

Return to Barefoot Social Worker

Handmade in Wales. © Copyright Hilary Searing 2014-9. All rights reserved.