Neutral Citation Number: [2009] EWMC 12 (FPC)

In the Magistrates’ Court
Family Proceedings Court

Before:
     
A District Judge 
     
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Between:

	X Local Authority	Applicant	
	and		
	Ms P Mother	1st Respondent	
	C a child through her Children’s Guardian	2nd Respondent	

- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Ms C for the   Applicant
No Legal Representative for the 1st   Respondent
Mr H  for the 2nd Respondent

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

WRITTEN REASONS

The written reasons are being distributed on the strict understanding that in any report, no person may be identified by name or location (Other than a person identified by name in the reasons themselves) and that in particular the anonymity of the children and the adult members of their family must be strictly preserved

Justices’ Reasons

	 

These Facts and Reasons have been agreed by all parties save for the first respondent, who does not oppose nor consent to them, such Facts and Reasons being adopted by the Court and the Court is satisfied the proposed order is appropriate in the circumstances of the case.	
1.	
This is an application by X Local Authority for a Care Order in respect of a child C who was born on [a date in] 2000.  C’s mother is Ms P, her father is Mr W.  Mr W does not have parental responsibility for C and has had very limited contact with his daughter.   In accordance with the rules as C’s birth father he would be entitled to notice of these proceedings. Mr W’s current whereabouts are still not known.   I am told that throughout the currency of these proceedings the Local Authority has continued their efforts to trace him and to give him notice of these proceedings without success.  The Local Authority has even obtained an order to seek information about his whereabouts from the Department of Work and Pensions but no information has been made available to them by that Department.  I am satisfied that in all the circumstances of this case and with the limited involvement Mr W has had in C’s life it is appropriate to proceed today in his absence and I formally dispense with the requirement for him to be given notice of these proceedings.	
2.	This case is listed before me today for an Issues Resolution Hearing and if all issues are resolved then for me to make final orders.  I dealt with a finding of fact hearing in relation to the Section 31 threshold criteria on the 10th September 2009 and made specific findings which were contained in my judgement from that hearing.	
3.	The Local Authority submits that the court should proceed today to make final orders and bring these proceedings to a conclusion even though Ms P has not attended court nor is she legally represented any longer.  It is submitted by the Local Authority that Ms P is aware of the court proceedings and has chosen not to engage with Social Care or the court process.  Ms P has chosen not to attend court and has not given any recent instructions to her solicitors.  A letter from Ms P’s solicitors has been faxed to the court confirming that they are without their client’s instructions and are unable to attend court to represent her.  I am told that Ms P has not had contact with C since September 2009 despite the best endeavours of Social Care to try to get her to attend for C’s benefit.	
4.	The child is represented through the Children’s Guardian Ms N and by solicitor Mr H.  Mr H and the Children’s Guardian agree with the submissions made on behalf of the Local Authority and invite the court to proceed to make final orders in the absence of Ms P.	
5.	The background to these proceedings is contained in the detailed statement at pages B1 – B21 of the bundle.  The family have been known to Social Care for a number of years and Ms P herself was subject to a care order.  C’s name was first placed on the child protection register in November 2002 due to concerns about neglect.  There were concerns about the home hygiene, lack of supervision and Ms P not always responding to professional input or being available for visits.  By 2003 Ms P’s situation had deteriorated and she had no fixed abode and C was left in the care of other people and had a very unsettled lifestyle.  There have been lengthy private law proceedings between Ms P and C’s step-father which ultimately resulted in a recommendation that C return to her mother’s care.  In March 2009 Social Care ended their involvement with Ms P and C but on the 8.5.09 a referral was received that C had had her hair shaved forcibly by her mother and mother’s partner, LB.  Whilst the parents have sought to explain their action C told the social worker that having her head shaved made her sad and her friends made fun of her pages B2 – B3, B24 and D10 of the bundle.  There is a report by a doctor who states at C6 “This is unacceptable and can be an emotionally traumatic experience for a child of her age”.  	
6	On the 14.5.09 a further referral was made to Social Care that both C and her mother had been assaulted by LB.  Ms P had sustained a black eye and C had bruising to her forehead.  C also alleged that she had been repeatedly smacked on the bottom by LB and she sustained significant bruising.  A doctor in paediatric medicine saw C and reported that C had some grazes and bruising above her left eye where C says she was hit by LB.  On examination of her buttocks she had four bruises on her left buttock measuring between 1 x 1.5 cms to 3 x 2 cms in size.  C says that these bruises are from when LB had hit her the previous day.  In the paediatrician’s opinion these injuries are non-accidental, because the injuries are consistent with the history that C gives about being hit by LB see pages C10 – C11 of the bundle.  On the 15.5.09 a doctor examined C and found that she was unkempt and her hygiene was unsatisfactory see pages C4 – C5 of the bundle.  This doctor’s opinion in respect of the bruising to C’s buttocks is that it is highly likely that this is non-accidental in origin given that C has disclosed being hit on the buttocks to several different professionals.	
7	I have been provided with a full bundle of papers which I have considered including the Children’s Guardian’s final analysis and recommendation report.  I have also heard representations from the parties in attendance at court today.	
8	Sadly there has been no contact with C by her mother since the 9th September 2009 and despite the very considerable efforts made by the Local Authority (including instructing an enquiry agent) and the Guardian the whereabouts of the mother are currently unknown.  I am however satisfied that Ms P is aware of the current proceedings and at best she is trying to evade service of recent documents and that she has therefore willingly chosen not to attend this hearing.  I am further satisfied that it is appropriate to proceed today to make a final order so that the future of C can be assured.  On the 10th September 2009 I made specific findings and I confirm that I declare myself satisfied that the threshold criteria contained in S31 of the Children Act for the making of a final order are met.	
9	I now turn to the need for an order and in reaching my decision have considered as I must all relevant welfare criteria as is required of me by the Children Act.  I remind myself that it is C’s welfare that must be my paramount concern.  I draw attention in particular to the part of the Guardian’s report which deals with C’s current disposition.  Some time ago C was described as a sad and unkempt little girl.  She is now described as an absolute delight full of smiles and with a great sense of humour.  C has hitherto had a difficult existence and I am pleased that she is now settled and is a happy and confident little girl.	
10	Before reaching my decision I have also considered the implications of the Human Rights Act and all the unchallenged evidence filed in this case.  I am satisfied that the only order that is appropriate in this case is a care order in favour of the council and I have no hesitation in making the final care order and concluding the proceedings today.  In making a care order in respect of C I approve the Local Authority’s care plan for her.  I note that even though Ms P has not attended for contact with C since September 2009 the Local Authority will continue to review this and make contact available for Ms P should she re-engage with Social Care and show a commitment to her daughter in the future.  I approve the proposals for contact contained in the care plan and therefore make no order in this regard.	
11	Before a District Judge on the 14.12.09.