Case No. EWFC-63
Family Court

Case No. EWFC-63

Fecha: 27-Feb-2023

Conclusion:

85.I have already made very substantial findings in relation to the mother’s inability to meet the needs of Y. I have been careful in this judgment, not to simply conclude from that that mother is not able to safely care for H during her childhood. H has very different needs to Y, and I am mindful that H has remained in her mother’s care until this point.86.I have balanced that H has expressed that she would like to stay with her mother and she loves her. There are positive aspects about her being able to attend school, and have some of her basic needs met. 87.The evidence however is simply overwhelming that the mother is not able properly to meet H’s needs currently, and that no protective or supportive options could be put into place to enable her to be able to do that. I accept the evidence of the independent social worker, and the psychologist which in both instances was both extremely clear and accurate. I accept the welfare analysis of the social worker and the guardian. H’s welfare needs are overwhelming at the moment and she needs proper attuned parenting from a carer able to place H’s needs as their paramount consideration. 88.I recognise that in making this decision, I am separating H from her mother and this is a significant interference with her right to family life. But it is necessary and proportionate in light of the findings that I have made. H needs a decision now. 89.Therefore, for all of the reasons above, I make the care order sought by the Local Authority and I approve the care plan for H to move to live in foster care. 90.Contact will have to be kept under review. Whilst it took some time to be clear in relation to the proposals for contact, what is set out in the amended care plans appears entirely appropriate. Although I heard quite a large amount of evidence about contact no one has asked me to make any orders pursuant to s34 of the Children Act 1989.91.I make no order as to costs, save for detailed public funding assessment of the publicly funded parties.END OJ JUDGMENT