M (Children : Welfare Hearing : No 2)

In determining a child’s welfare, the court must balance the immediate shock and distress caused by changing an established living arrangement against the long-term advantages of preserving or restoring important family relationships. Where a child’s circumstances expose her to significant harm attributable to the care being provided, and the statutory threshold is met, an interim care order may be necessary and proportionate. The court may direct removal from the existing environment, placement in foster care, supervised parental contact and urgent work to rebuild relationships where those measures are required to protect welfare.

This was a welfare hearing concerning two sisters, B and C. B lived with her father and paternal family, while C lived with their mother. The court had previously made findings concerning the family’s conduct and the children’s relationships. At this hearing, the court considered whether the existing arrangements could continue, whether the sisters should be reunited, and what protective measures were required in light of B’s apparent alienation from her mother and deteriorating relationship with C.

1. The welfare of B and C was the court’s paramount consideration. The evidence demonstrated that B had been subjected to damaging influence and manipulation within the paternal family environment. The existing arrangements were causing serious harm to her relationship with her mother and sister.
2. The court was required to balance B’s settled life, attachment to her father and likely short-term shock against the overwhelming long-term benefits of restoring meaningful relationships with her mother and sister. Although removal would cause substantial distress, the balance could only be struck by removing B from her current environment.
3. The court directed the local authority to investigate B’s circumstances under Children Act s.37(1), and directed that a report be filed within eight weeks. Having made that direction, the court was satisfied under Children Act s.38(1)(b) that there were reasonable grounds for believing that B was suffering, and was likely to suffer, significant harm attributable to the care given to her.
4. The threshold under Children Act s.31 was overwhelmingly satisfied. An interim care order for eight weeks was necessary and proportionate because of the immediate risks. B was to be removed forthwith and placed with suitable foster parents. Placement with the mother was deferred as an untested move which might increase, rather than reduce, the trauma.
5. The local authority was directed to undertake urgent and intensive work to rebuild B’s relationship with her mother and C, including eventual placement with the mother when appropriate. Contact with the father was to be carefully managed and supervised. There was to be no contact with the paternal grandmother at that stage.