Case No. LV21C01426
Family Court

Case No. LV21C01426

Fecha: 16-Dic-2022

The parties’ positions

5.The mother and F1 who reside together wish for all the children returned to their care. They acknowledged that immediate return may not be appropriate and that there may be a period of transition. They would agree to the children being placed with them under care orders. In default of the children being returned to them, the mother and F1 contest the making of placement orders for any of the children and would wish them to be placed in long-term foster care.6.F2, the father of W, wishes W to be settled and happy. He acknowledges that he is not able to offer to care for W. Whilst F2 would like W to be placed in long-term foster care in default of him being able to return to his mother, he understands that adoption may give W the best way of achieving stability.7.The children’s Guardian Madeleine Jones does not agree that the local authority’s plan will best serve the children’s welfare. The Guardian’s view is that W should not be placed for adoption and should remain in long-term foster care. Further, the Guardian does not agree that it will be appropriate for X to be placed as a sibling group for adoption with Y and Z. Whilst the Guardian agrees that placement for adoption would be the right outcome for the three younger siblings, she does not agree that they should be placed together.