Special guardianship best practice guidance

Recent guidance published by the Public Law Working Group recommends urgent changes to local authority and court practices in respect of special guardianship orders (SGOs). The guidance explicitly acknowledges the challenges facing an underfunded and inadequately resourced system.

Prospective special guardians have found themselves thrust into the complexity of care proceedings with little preparation, independent legal advice or time to think. Some carers and children had little prior knowledge and experience of each other. The Parliamentary Taskforce’s Report on Kinship Care highlights the significant and growing needs of kinship carers and the children they care for.

The decision to publish the guidance in June (during the pandemic, when other significant publications were delayed) was made because these issues cannot wait. At CoramBAAF, we hear from lawyers and social workers who are increasingly frustrated with the lack of a strategic implementation plan.

Significant option for permanence

Since its introduction in 2005, the Special Guardianship Order has been a significant new option for permanence. In recent years, the proportion of SGOs has risen while the proportion of placement orders has fallen. The number of children leaving care through SGOs is now more than the number of children leaving care through adoption. In the 2015 Department for Education review of special guardianship, concerns were raised about the adequacy of assessments and the significant pressures created by the statutory duty to complete proceedings within 26 weeks.

The best practice guidance addresses these serious issues and sets out a renewed emphasis on the child-special guardian relationship. The guidance is unequivocal; robust evidence from the placement must not be limited by timescales that are not on the side of the child and the carers – particularly 26 weeks. The guidance identifies the fundamental importance of evidence, experience and the child’s development over time as they settle into placement. It returns to the legal principle in the Act of a private law application requiring one year of caring for the child before the application can be made. It recognises that the plan for the child and the making of the order need to be addressed on an individual case-by-case basis.

Monitoring implementation

The Public Law Working Group envisages that local Family Justice Boards will play a key role in monitoring implementation of this best practice guidance and ensuring good practice is achieved by all those involved in the child protection and family justice systems. There should be a locally agreed protocol about assessments, timescales and process. The protocol should reflect best practice guidance, be child and carer centred and evidence informed. Co-production of protocols, involving families and young people who have lived experience of care proceedings, will add to their richness and effectiveness. At this stage, not all authorities and Family Justice Boards have developed clear guidance or protocols on performance. We are aware that knowledge of the guidance remains patchy across the country.

We have to do better. While there are no simple solutions, currently good practice is too reliant on the creativity and commitment of individual practitioners and service leads.

This is a systems issue and we need to see a response at a strategic level.

FURTHER READING

• First Thought Not Afterthought, Parliamentary Taskforce on Kinship Care, September 2020
• Best practice guidance, Public Law Working Group, June 2020
  
  

Legal news in brief

Ban on hotel accommodation for lone child migrants

The High Court has ruled in a landmark case that unaccompanied child migrants cannot be placed in hotels and have a right to be placed in the care of social services, following legal action by three asylum seekers aged 17. Mrs Justice Lang said that Hillingdon Council’s decision to place the children in a hotel with adults was a “significant departure from past practice by local authorities” and that the council had failed to “discharge its duties under the Children Act 1989 and instead is seeking to sidestep its statutory duty”.

Government review of family courts

The government has launched a review into how the current approach to decisions on parental access made in the family courts is impacting child safety. Currently, the presumption of “parental involvement” which the courts are required to follow in their judgments encourages a child’s relationship with both parents, unless the involvement would put the child at risk of harm. London’s independent victims’ commissioner, Claire Waxman, argues that under the current system, many abuse survivors have to pay for the cost of facilitating child contact arrangements with the person who perpetrated the abuse.

Call for medical experts to give evidence in the family court remotely

A working group led by Sir Andrew McFarlane, president of the family division, has called for medical experts to be allowed to give evidence remotely to tackle the shortage of experts that contribute to delays in court processes that could be harmful to children. The working group report called for professional bodies to create online resources to support expert witness work. McFarlane added that remote hearings during the pandemic have “demonstrated real advantages in making attendance at court hearings less disruptive of clinical practice”.

Westminster Commission on Legal Aid launches

The Westminster Commission on Legal Aid will hear evidence from social justice lawyers across England and Wales over the next six months and will investigate the impact of the 2012 cuts to legal aid implemented in the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act. Areas of investigation will include the vulnerability of children in prison and family legal aid.