Children's services leaders issue warning on voluntary care orders

The call follows concern within the family courts regarding what has been called “the misuse and abuse” of section 20 (s20) agreements by local authorities under the Children Act 1989.

Last year Sir James Munby, president of the Family Division of the High Court of England and Wales, said he was concerned about children being placed with s20 care agreements as a long “prelude to care proceedings”.

The warning features in new guidance issued today by the Association of Directors of Children’s Services, the Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service (Cafcass), and the Association of Directors of Social Services Cymru. 

“We share judicial concern about those s20 cases which have drifted without decent care plans for children, where individual children looked after have suffered demonstrable harm or detriment as a direct result,” the guidance states.

“This type of practice can never be excused or condoned. All local authorities should take steps to ensure they do not have a single s20 arrangement of this sort.”

"This assurance can only be achieved by ensuring that every s20 case open to a local authority has been actively reviewed and that s20 status remains the appropriate current legal option and framework for the child."

The guidance also sets out best practice of s20 for newborn babies, examples of where s20 is used appropriately, and clarifies the duties and responsibilities a local authority has to a child who is looked-after under s20.

Anthony Douglas, chief executive of Cafcass, said up to 30 per cent of children who are looked-after by a local authority are done so under s20.

"In the absence of clear guidance for the use of s20, there was a real risk that recent court judgments could lead local authorities to misinterpret the law, and to always issue care proceedings when a child becomes looked after," he said. 

"However, s20 remains an option which will be the right approach for many children. We have agreed this guidance around s20 to clarify expectations and ensure that local authorities interpret the law correctly and in a strengths-based way, without disregarding risk.”
 
Andrew Webb, family justice lead at the ADCS, said: “The recent rise in applications for care and supervision orders in respect of children and young people accommodated voluntarily, and Sir James Munby’s detailed ruling at the end of last year, underpin this work.  
 
“S20 placements are an important legal option and are most obviously appropriate where the child’s parent is unable to care for them due to a hospital admission, for example. Short breaks for children with additional needs are also accommodated under s20."