Adoption
Lots of comment via email to a PM story last week about an adoption case involving East Sussex County Council.
The child's birth-father -- who discovered he had a child only when the council served care proceedings on him and asked him for a DNA test -- had asked for the placement order to be revoked.
But one day before the planned hearing, the council ratified the adoption panel's decision, denying the father the chance to be heard by a judge.
Senior judges at the Court of Appeal described the council's conduct as "disgraceful". They said its actions would "fuel public distrust in the good faith of public authority", and there was the "clearest inference" that the council was "out to gain its ends by means more foul than fair".
Here's Eddie interviewing the father's solicitor, Barbara Macdonald.
The piece provoked quite a reaction. Listener John McReynolds wrote:
It's rare that hearing an item on the radio makes me stop and gape open-mouthed in disbelief at what I am . But it happened today on the piece about East Sussex Social Services Council and their action with the adoption of the child when an application for the Father's parenting suitability had been served.
Please don't let this story drop. In effect, as the father's legal representative said, they decided to usurp the Court where the decision-making should take place.
And Tim Thornton emailed that:
The UK is, I believe, the only country in Europe, and one of a few countries in the world, where children can be forcibly adopted against the wishes of the parents.
This is an area of law and procedure that is in desperate need of being overhauled, but is one that it is very difficult to publicise. Some, such as John Hemming MP, are actively campaigning for a review, and this needs to be instigated as a matter of urgency.
Several emailers lay the blame on the system of adoption targets, claiming they provide a financial incentive for councils to place children in adoption. As Tim notes, has been for a while. Others dismiss the worries as unfounded, that a laissez-faire attitude would put children in danger.
We're open to any ideas on how to approach the issue on iPM. Post your suggestions in the comments, and we'll discuss them at the Tuesday meeting.
Email us
Listen to iPM