Y (A Child) (No 2), Re

In care proceedings concerning an older child, where the threshold is established and the child’s welfare requires continuing support during the transition to adulthood, a final care order may be appropriate even where the child does not consent to it. The order should be understood as a means of securing practical help, support and assistance from the local authority, rather than as a mechanism for imposing unnecessary restrictions. The court may approve a care plan and, insofar as relevant, a pathway plan where they provide a suitable framework for the child’s continuing support and transition into adult life.

These were care proceedings concerning Y, a sixteen-year-old child. His mother had died unexpectedly and his father did not have parental responsibility. Because of difficulties affecting his care, Y had suffered neglect and had been beyond parental control. He had previously required placement in secure accommodation, but had subsequently progressed and moved to suitable semi-independent residential accommodation.

There was no challenge to the local authority’s threshold case. The issue before the court was whether, having regard exclusively to Y’s welfare and his future needs, a final care order should be made and the local authority’s Care Plan and Pathway Plan approved.

1. Final care order. The court made a final care order without opposition. Although Y did not consent to the order, everyone considered that the time had come for a final order and that a care order was appropriate.
2. Welfare assessment. The threshold was plainly established, so the court’s task was exclusively to consider Y’s welfare. Y had made remarkable progress. He had developed positive views about his future, engaged well with professionals, wished to pursue education and had settled in a semi-independent placement which suited him.
3. Care and pathway planning. The court approved the final Care Plan and, insofar as it was a matter for the court, the Pathway Plan. The plans provided an appropriate basis for supporting Y as he moved towards adult life. The court commended the local authority, particularly for the in-depth nature of its pathway planning.
4. Purpose of the order. A care order was appropriate because it gave Y the best chance of obtaining the help, support and assistance he needed and wanted from the local authority, both while he remained in care and after leaving care under the applicable leaving-care legislation. The essential function of the local authority during Y’s transition was to provide support and services, rather than to impose unnecessary control. The order therefore recorded that its purpose was to assist Y and provide practical support during his transition into adulthood.