Case No. EWFC-63

21.I am conscious that when Y was in the mother’s care, she required very extensive amounts of the mother’s time. She is a child who needs to be constantly watched, and indeed certainly when she was younger, she had a number of life-threatening incidents. It is inevitable therefore, that H at times had her needs not met as fully as they might have been had the mother not been extremely busy caring for Y. I bear that in mind and the very significant pressures upon the mother over a period of years in relation to the matters I set out in this judgment.22.The court now has the benefit of an extremely thorough parenting assessment carried out by the independent social worker. I have reminded myself of the parenting assessment carried out by the previous social worker employed by the local authority in 2017.23.Within the 2017 report there is a list set out of the ‘main issues’ that concerned that social worker. It is notable that many of those issues set out in list form there echo the concerns now. They include concerns of the mother not being able to listen to medical professionals, issues with health which had not been substantiated by other professionals, the mother putting trust in new friends quickly which could pose a risk to the children, the mother reporting difficulties with her medical conditions, concerns about the consistency of the home conditions, the mother not being able to consistently use parenting strategies she has been taught, and that her mental health appears to impact upon her parenting.24.The formulation of that assessment set out that the mother was struggling to manage the parenting of both children. Many of the matters that caused concern in relation to that parenting assessment have now been dealt with within my previous judgment. In relation to the mother’s ability to provide good enough parenting, that report sets out the number of times that the mother has attended parenting courses, and yet also sets out the difficulties that the mother experienced in parenting H. 25.On internal page 28 of that report from 2017 the following paragraph appears:“My professional opinion is that both children are at risk of significant harm due to the inconsistency in the care that is provided to them. [Y] is at risk of significant harm due to the occasions that medical advice is not sought in a timely way which puts her at higher risk of seizure. [M]’s behaviour does not help with discharges and she often contradicts herself by saying the hospital neglect [Y] but refuses to take [Y] home. [Y] is impacted upon by this as she is not receiving consistent care that promotes her physical and emotional development. It is unlikely that there will be any vast change in [M]’s behaviours until she accesses appropriate mental health assessment. [H] is at risk of significant harm due to [M]’s lack of knowledge about the risks posed to [H] by people [M] trusts to look after her. [H] is also at risk due to the lack of consistency in the parenting that is provided to her which means her emotional needs are not being fully and consistently met”.26.It can be seen that that mirrors almost entirely the continued concerns in relation to H. 27.The formulation of that social worker in 2017 was that both children were at risk of significant harm due to the care being provided to them. In particular in relation to H, that report sets out that the mother’s lack of knowledge about the risks posed to H by people that the mother trusted to look after her posed a risk to her. The report also set out that H was at risk due to the lack of consistency in the parenting that was provided to her, which meant her emotional needs are not being fully and consistently met.28.Care proceedings were not commenced at that time, but the local authority have worked with the mother since that point.29.The independent social work report filed recently in this matter deals with the mother’s ability to care for both children, and concludes that it would not be safe for her to care for either or both of the children. The independent social worker specifically confirmed, that even if the mother accepted Y would not return to her care, she still recommended that H was removed from the mother’s care.30.She also at paragraph 4 of her report sets out a list of issues, in which she repeated many of those from the 2017 report, and then has added further issues and difficulties. 31.That is a lengthy and thorough report, which reaches extremely clear recommendations. Although the independent social worker was carefully cross-examined on behalf of the mother, she did not change her views in relation to any aspect of it.