IMPORTANT NOTICE
This judgment was delivered in private. The judge has given leave for an anonymised version of the judgment to be published on condition that (irrespective of what is contained in the judgment) in any published version of the judgment the anonymity of the children and members of their family must be strictly preserved. All persons, including representatives of the media, must ensure that this condition is strictly complied with. Failure to do so will be a contempt of court.
Case No: LS15C00659 
IN THE FAMILY COURT SITTING IN LEEDS

IN THE MATTER OF THE CHILDREN ACT 1989

AND IN THE MATTER OF X, Y AND Z (CHILDREN)

Date: 30 March 2016

Before :

HHJ Lynch

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

Between :

	A Local Authority	Applicant	
	- and -		
	    A Mother (M) (1)

    A Father (F) (2)

    Grandparents (GM & GF) (3 & 4)

The Children
(through their Children’s Guardian) (5-7)

Respondents	
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

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

Lynn Crabtree for the Local Authority
Gerald Browne for the 1st Respondent
Stephen Brown for the 2nd Respondent
Jennifer Noel for the 3rd & 4th Respondents
Jane Leadbetter for the Children

Hearing dates: 29 & 30 March 2016
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

JUDGMENT
Introduction
1.	In these proceedings I am concerned for three young children all aged under seven, X, Y and Z. Their parents are M and F who share parental responsibility for them. The children live with their grandparents, GF and GM, and have done so since June of last year, by agreement with their parents. Throughout that time the children have had regular supervised contact with their parents.
2.	Prior to this court case beginning the local authority had already been involved with this family due to concerns about the ability of the parents to meet children's needs. The local authority began these proceedings to secure the care arrangements for the children. At the first hearing in this case on 22 October 2015, child arrangement orders were made confirming that all three children should live with their grandparents. Interim supervision orders were also made and have been in place ever since. The case was due to be ready for final hearing earlier than this week but delays in the gathering of evidence meant the case had to be listed before the twenty six weeks expired this week. At a final review hearing last week, my first involvement in the case, it became clear much had been agreed between the parties and indeed yet more progress has been made at court this week.
3.	The parties have all been able to agree that the threshold has been crossed, a required first step before any public law orders can be made. What has been agreed is as follows and sets out the situation as it was when these proceedings began last year :
a. There has been ongoing Social Services involvement with the family since the birth of X initially on a Child in Need Plan basis but since 3 March 2015 the children have been subject to Child Protection Plans under the category of neglect.
b. M has experienced issues with depression from 2009 and F has a diagnosis of autism, ADHD and dyslexia and has been assessed as having a mild learning disability.  These issues have impacted on their ability to care for the children in that they have led to the parents struggling with the day to day care of the children with regards to routine, which in particular has affected X’s school attendance, and also in relation to their ability to engage with professionals.
c. Home conditions were also not ideal for the children and living arrangements were unacceptable. 
d. The relationship between the parents was “ up and down”.
e. The children have experienced instability in that they have moved to live with their grandparents initially in October 2014 before returning to their parents care in November 2014.  They were then placed again with their grandparents in June 2015 and there has been issues with regards to the parents exercising regular and consistent contact.
Background
4.	The background to this case is well set out in the guardian's final report and I take my summary from there. The children and their parents have been known to Children’s Services since November 2008 when M was pregnant with X. At that point in time, concerns were raised regarding the parents’ immaturity and their capacity to parent. The paternal grandmother also raised concerns regarding her son’s coping skills and poor sleeping pattern, F having a diagnosis of ADHD/autistic spectrum disorder.  A core assessment was undertaken but at that stage no additional intervention was felt to be necessary as the parents had family support. 
5.	Throughout 2009 there were several referrals made to Children’s Services, mostly regarding poor home conditions and a lack of routine. Family relationships became more fraught and concerns also surfaced regarding the  mother’s mental health. At this point, intervention with the family was on a Child In Need basis. Matters however deteriorated by February 2013. The headteacher of X’s school made a referral due to her poor nursery attendance. Safeguarding concerns were also raised regarding X being found unsupervised whilst her parents were reported to be upstairs asleep. A s17 assessment identified that the family had been struggling to adapt to the birth of Y and improvements were subsequently reported. Following Z’s birth in May 2014 however the toll of caring for three young children led to increasing challenges and demands.  A significant deterioration was seen in respect of the parents’ ability to meet all the children’s needs, including safe supervision, schooling and their health needs. Further assessments were undertaken including a child protection assessment in September 2014. F and M did not engage well and ultimately it was found that the children had been left in their grandparents’ care without the knowledge of the local authority.  
6.	By December 2014, F and M resumed care of the children and the child protection assessment continued. In February 2015 there was an incident when X was not collected from school and parents were not contactable, leading to the girls becoming subject to Child Protection Plans under the category of neglect.  By May 2015 further safeguarding concerns were raised by a family support worker and the local fire service. In June 2015 it became apparent that the children were again living with their grandparents and the parents were reported to be abroad, leading to these proceedings being begun to secure the children’s living arrangements. 
The issues and the position of the parties
7.	In preparing for this hearing I have read the full bundle of papers provided to me in this matter, together with a letter from F’s GP which had not made its way into the bundle.  Due to the fact that there was no disagreement between the parties as to the orders I should make today it was not necessary to hear from any witnesses. 
8.	Agreement has been reached between the various parties involved in this case that the children should remain living with their grandparents. The local authority carried out a parenting assessment of M and F and a separate PAMS based assessment was done with F. The parenting assessment was negative. It did identify various strengths in terms of M and F’s parenting but also identified ongoing concerns, particularly regarding their ability to prioritise the children’s needs above their own and to demonstrate their ability to parent the children safely and effectively. The assessment concluded that it was highly likely the children would experience further harm and neglect should they return to their parents’ care. The PAMS assessment of F identified that he had a good understanding of children’s needs, although there were some areas where he would benefit from developing his knowledge and skills. The point was made though that the assessment relied on self-reporting, the author noting that historically F had struggled to put what he knew into practice in terms of his parenting of the girls. The local authority would have liked a full assessment of F by a psychiatrist specialising in autism, over and above the cognitive assessment which was carried out, but F was not willing for this to happen.
9.	The local authority's assessment of the grandparents in contrast was positive. It was felt they had shown over the preceding months that they could meet the needs of the girls, ensuring the girls could grow up living in their birth family. They acknowledged some issues historically with the grandparents but felt at the time of their assessment these were not such that they should not preclude the girls being placed with them throughout their childhoods.
10.	The parents in their final statements did not agree to the plan of their daughters remaining with the grandparents, given the changes the parents felt they had made and their improved engagement with professionals. M exhibited photos showing improvements in the home. She also talked in her statement of the issues her own mother had had in the past, how it had impacted on M and how it therefore worried her that things may get worse for her own daughters if they remained living with their grandparents and the grandmother's situation deteriorated. M and F did say in their statements however if the Court did not agree the girls should come home they wanted their contact to remain at a good level and to move away from it being supervised entirely by the grandparents.
11.	By the time of the issues resolution hearing the parents had spoken with the guardian and their position evolved. The guardian said in her report how M and F had gradually come to see how their parenting had had an effect on their daughters and what changes would be needed for the future. The guardian saw a difference in their attitude when she met with them prior to preparing her report compared to when the proceedings began. The parents were now able to recognise that M needed F’s support in caring for the children but that he could not give this consistently. They could acknowledge that his autism impacted on his day to day functioning and that as a result they had struggled jointly to implement a positive routine and to prioritise the children’s needs. The couple could see that their own issues had contributed to the problems. The guardian noted they were now trying to address this, M taking anti-depressants and F’s GP having changed his medication and referred him for therapy. The parents told the guardian they wanted to work with people, to take on board advice and learn from their mistakes. The parents felt they had made improvements but recognised they still had a long way to go.
12.	At court those representing the parents have been able to go through the plans with the parents and have input into those. That has led to the parents reaching the position of agreeing that the girls should remain living with The grandparents, as well as agreeing the plans for their contact. M felt it would be helpful to have the ongoing involvement of the local authority by way of supervision orders being made, F being neutral in respect of this. 
13.	The grandparents too have agreed the plans for the girls. They remain committed to giving them a long term home but are keen to support the girls in having a good relationship with their parents. It is evident that just in recent weeks contact arrangements have become more flexible and this has benefitted the girls. Only GF has been able to be at court for this final hearing, GM being at home caring for the girls, but I am told her views have been sought and that she too agrees to the plans. 
14.	In the guardian's report she set out improvements the parents have made, including to conditions in their home although there are still some issues in this regard. M and F have worked with a family support worker who has assisted them to put routines in place for themselves as well as helping improve their understanding of parenting matters. M is going to be attending two parenting courses which were identified with the assistance of the family support worker.
15.	It is also evident to me from the documentation I have read that the grandparents are very committed to the girls and the assessment of them by the local authority is positive. The guardian too observed warm and loving relationships between the children and their grandparents, whom she said parented the children to a good standard. She noted from the medical evidence that the grandparents had health issues which, if they deteriorated in the future, could impact upon their ability to care for their grandchildren. Some of these issues relate to the grandmother's history of alcohol dependency and also her mental health. The guardian noted the professional evidence that there was a significant risk of relapse in respect of these issues.
16.	In the weeks running up to this hearing when final evidence was being filed, discussions took place between the social worker and guardian looking at what order should be put in place to secure the girls’ home with their grandparents, the professionals agreeing this was the right place for the girls, and also what arrangements there should be for contact between them and their parents. The local authority's recommendation had been special guardianship orders and for significantly reduced contact. The guardian did not support these plans. Unusually I am going to quote in their entirety a number of paragraphs from the guardian's report as they set out the balancing exercise she went through in her mind when looking at the options for the children, which exercise I am endorsing in making the orders agreed between the parties.
72. The placement of X, Y and Z in the care of their grandparents at this time is in my view, the right decision. I believe that The grandparents are strongly motivated and committed and that they are currently able to provide a suitable and stable placement for X, Y and Z. The observed close, warm and trusting attachment behaviours displayed by the children underpins the importance of this placement. Additionally, the improvements in the relationships between the grandparents and the parents, can only serve to benefit the children’s sense of emotional wellbeing in the long term. Particularly as it is hoped that contact will increase and progress naturally. 
73. It is clear that The grandparents depend on each other to care for the children. However, I am concerned that their health conditions mean that they are mutually reliant on each other to care for the children. As the children grow up, parenting may become more stressful. If either of them were to suffer further ill health, the other partner would require significant support to continue to care for the children to prevent the children becoming Young Carers. 
74. The parents have made efforts to improve their housing situation and have voiced that they intend to take up services of support to effect change and heed the advice of the family support worker in terms of their own and the children’s routines. The parent’s contact with the children evidences good quality contact, with the parents making efforts to stimulate the children with activities during the time they spend with them. It is clear that the children have established positive and enduring emotional attachments to their parents and enjoy the time they spend with them. 
75. It is hoped that the parents can deliver on their stated intentions and that safe contact can progress.
17.	Prior to filing her report the guardian spoke at some length to the social worker regarding her thinking about both the girls’ placement with their grandparents and about the role of the parents in their lives. After those discussions the social worker and the guardian were able to agree that the girls were best placed with their grandparents and that this placement should be secured by the making of child arrangement orders rather than special guardianship orders. It was also agreed that a plan needed to be put in place to set out contact arrangements between the girls and their parents, including a plan for moving this forward, and I shall return to that plan later in this judgment. The arrangements for the children would be supported by the making of supervision orders, keeping the local authority involved for twelve months to advise and assist the family. 
Decision
18.	I now turn to consider what orders if any are in the best interests of X, Y and Z.  I start from the position that, wherever possible, children should be brought up by their natural parents and if not by other members of their family.  The state should not interfere in family life so as to separate children from their families unless it has been demonstrated to be both necessary and proportionate and that no other less radical form of order would achieve the essential aim of promoting their welfare.  
19.	In reaching my decision I have considered the factors set out in the welfare checklist in the Children Act. I have also taken into account that the girls’ welfare is my paramount consideration and that the Court should  make the least interventionist order possible. I must also consider the Article 8 rights of the adults and the children as my decision inevitably involves an interference with the right to respect to family life. Having given very careful consideration to the orders I am going on to make, I am satisfied that those orders are in accordance with law, necessary for the protection of the children’s rights and are proportionate.  
20.	It is important that the girls live with carers who can meet all of their needs. Their needs are those of any child as young as them, including living in a house which is safe and clean, going to school or nursery as appropriate, not being left without proper supervision, and experiencing predictable parenting from their carers including the provision of appropriate boundaries. 
21.	If I look at the options of the girls remaining with their grandparents or moving back to live with their parents, I agree that their current placement best meets their needs. At the present time the grandparents are ensuring that the girls have a stable and settled home, one in which all their needs are being met. The effect of the harm the girls have already experienced is being lessened. They are also able to have an ongoing relationship with their parents whilst living with their grandparents. Remaining where they are means that they do not have to experience yet another change in their primary carers and that stability is very important for children as young as these girls. I acknowledge as the guardian did that there are matters in the recent past of the grandparents which may lead to concerns in the future but at the present time The grandparents are giving the girls exactly what they need. 
22.	I also accept the analysis of the social worker and guardian that at the present time the parents are not able to meet all the needs of the girls. They do seem to be making improvements but more is still needed. They need to work with their GPs to address health issues and it would certainly be beneficial for M to attend parenting classes. The quality of contact the parents have shared with the children shows that they can give the girls good care but consistency is also very important. The parents have to show that they can both keep up the changes they have made and continue to improve. Whilst doing so it is important that they have regular involvement in their children’s lives, as the girls can only benefit from all the important adults in their lives working together. I was pleased to hear there is to be a Family Group Conference in April to look at how this can be developed. The parents of course will retain their parental responsibility for the girls. 
23.	The other issue the parties spent time discussing yesterday were the arrangements for contact between the girls and their parents. The guardian had in her report set out a proposal as to how contact might move over time towards unsupervised weekend contact. Again, following discussions between all the parties at court yesterday it was possible for a plan to be put together as to how contact might develop and that plan was approved overnight by senior management at the local authority, meaning it could be put to me as an agreed plan. 
24.	The proposals for contact are very detailed and are set out in the children’s care plans. Contact is to reduce from its current pattern to weekly contact each Saturday, initially to be supervised by The grandparents. That supervised contact will be at the contact centre for the first session but then out in the community before moving by around the fifth week to the parents’ home. By week seven of the plan some of the contact will be unsupervised and by week nine it will be entirely unsupervised, at which point a review will take place. The contact will then extend in duration until it reaches five hours by week thirteen. 
25.	Contact will be reviewed again at this point to discuss the next steps. The plans state that there is potential for the contact to progress to overnight stays and longer periods of time, as well as additional contact around special celebrations. This will depend upon F and M demonstrating their ability to make changes and sustain these in respect of their lifestyle and ability to prioritise the children’s needs. The plans state this would include the parents keeping to the contact plan, being prepared for contact, maintaining home conditions to an acceptable standard, and participating in work recommended such as attending an appropriate parenting course. Contact will continue to be a focus at each Child in Need Review Meeting which will take place at least every twelve weeks. 
26.	Having considered the agreement reached between the parties as to future contact, I am very happy to endorse that. It seems to me a very sensible way forward, ensuring that the girls have the best possible relationship with their parents. I agree to make a child arrangements order in respect of contact to the effect that the grandparents shall make the children available to spend time with their father and mother as set out in the amended care plans and any additional contact that is agreed.
27.	I also agree with the proposal that supervision orders be made in respect of each of the girls, to last for the next twelve months. It is important that the family have ongoing support in case there are any difficulties and the making of supervision orders formalises arrangements with the local authority in that respect. 
28.	Having therefore conducted the required balancing exercise, I am satisfied that the local authority’s final plans for X, Y and Z are proportionate and, in the context of s1(1) Children Act 1989, in their best welfare interests. I therefore approve those plans and make the following orders. 
a. I make a child arrangements order in respect of each of the girls confirming they live with their grandparents. Included in that order will be a recital setting out the plans for contact between the girls and their parents. 
b. I make a child arrangements order in respect of contact to the effect that the grandparents shall make the children available to spend time with their father and mother as set out in the amended care plans and any additional contact that is agreed by the parties subject to consultation with the local authority while the order is in place.
c. I make supervision orders in favour of the local authority for the duration of twelve months. 
d. I also make a public funding direction for all assisted parties.