Case No. LV21C01426

Tracy Barton is the adoption manager for the local authority and is the person best placed to inform the Court as to the steps the local authority would take to place each of the children in a suitable adoption placement. The Court was impressed by the local authority’s overall approach to securing sustainable adoptive placements. Whilst the approach is somewhat formulaic in the sense that she adopts a model used by another local authority (East Anglia) Miss Barton evidenced a professional and caring approach to the placement of children by this local authority.68.Miss Barton’s evidence explained how searches were conducted and outlined timetables for appropriate searches. Of particular significance within her evidence Miss Barton explained support the children and prospective adopters would receive to promote sustainability of placements. There was reference to specialist support services such as deploying therapeutic work.69.Under cross-examination it became increasingly apparent that whilst the local authority has very clear intentions to support ongoing adoptive placements, at this stage the local authority was unable to be clear as to what support would be needed and for how long the support would last. This is understandable. What is important is that this is the local authority that in my judgment is taking great care to ensure the adoptive placement of children is as sustainable as possible and is fully alive to the need to provide ongoing support to children and adoptive parents following placement.70.With regard to finding a successful placement for W Ms Barton explained all searches that are being deployed and confirmed that one placement to be identified as being potentially viable and that placement will be further explored if a placement order would be made. In the event that placement is not considered to be suitable it will be the local authority’s plan to continue searching for a placement W for six months and then if unsuccessful to place W in long-term foster care.71.Ms Barton confirmed that during observations and work with the children she had become to know them well and of particular note of W it was Miss Barton’s evidence that W’ main relationship is with his siblings not as parents, a view held by the Children’s Guardian but not the Social Worker whose opinion was exactly the opposite.72.The position regarding sibling contact in the event of a child being placed for adoption was confirmed as resulting in no further contact taking place between siblings unless all the siblings having contact were either in long-term foster placement or they all had been adopted. As stated above this would mean that if W were to be the subject of long-term foster care and his siblings adopted W will have no ongoing direct contact with his adopted siblings and they would have no ongoing direct contact with him. This is expressed to the Court as a commonly held view. There is certainly no restriction (absent an order prohibiting such) against inter-sibling contact where one child is adopted and the other in long term foster care.