Rosemary Bennett, Social Affairs Correspondent
2 for 1 tickets to Casablanca, this coming Monday
A teenage mother will today resume the battle to keep her newborn baby after social workers made a second attempt to remove him from her care.
The mother, known as G, spent the night in hospital with her son under close supervision after magistrates yesterday failed to reach a verdict on whether the boy should be placed with foster parents.
The 18-year-old was reunited with her baby on Wednesday after the dramatic intervention of a High Court judge. In an extraordinary ruling, the judge ordered that the baby boy born in the early hours of Wednesday morning and removed by social workers should be returned immediately.
Solicitors for the mother presented evidence suggesting that social workers had acted without any legal authority, and argued the mother did not represent a threat to the child.
But social workers at Nottingham City Council yesterday applied for an “interim care order”, which almost always means the child being removed.
The mother was taken into the care system herself after running away from home and suffers from mental health problems. Neither she nor the baby can be named for legal reasons.
Last night, Nottingham City Council released a statement saying that lawyers would return to court this morning. “We have been in court all day. We’re happy that there is appropriate protection overnight for the baby who is our primary concern in this case,” it said.
On Wednesday the High Court judge, Mr Justice Munby, said that social workers had “on the face of it” broken the law by insisting that the mother and child be separated without first obtaining a court order and “should have known better”.
Family rights campaigners say that social workers are increasingly jumping the gun and removing babies from their mothers to try to increase their adoption figures. It is much easier to find new families for new babies than older children.
Official data show the number of babies taken into care rose to 2,800 in 2005 from just 1,600 in 1995. Social workers say they are intervening more quickly in cases where there is evidence that a baby could come to harm.
Experts say it would be very unusual for social workers not to follow the procedures laid down in law.
John Coughlan, head of the Association of Directors of Children’s Services, said he had never come across a case where social workers acted in the way alleged in this case.
“I have never encountered a case where there has, apparently, been a failure of process of the type the court intervened on. If that occurred, it would be extraordinary as everything is process-led with numerous checks and balances,” he said. Social workers were criticised yesterday in a government-commissioned report for failings in dealing with dozens of at-risk children who subsequently died or were seriously injured. Researchers from the University of East Anglia looked at 161 serious cases of child abuse and neglect between April 2003 and March 2005. Two thirds of the children died and the rest suffered serious injuries. Nearly half involved babies under 12 months old.
Caring formula
1,400 newborn babies taken into care in 2005-06, compared with 540 in 1995
2,800 children under 12 months taken into care in 2005 compared with 1,600 in 1995
2,700 number of children adopted in 2000
40% percentage increase in adoptions demanded by Tony Blair in 2006
3,700 number of children adopted in 2006, an increase of 37 per cent on 2000
£18m payout shared by 30 local authorities for meeting the target to increase adoptions in their areas
35 number of children killed by a parent in England and Wales each year
Source: Government departments, NSPCC
Enjoy screenings of all the classic films you love.
Have you ever dreamed of owning your own racehorse or a beautiful painting?
Enjoy comfort, safety, space and great design. Plus enter our great competition
Are you California dreaming? Explore the wonders of the Golden State. Also enter our fantastic competition
Do you have what it takes to be a Times photographer?
Your brain is capable of more than you might think...
Find out to make the most of your money with our wealth management guides
Need help with your property? We have an entire how to guide - buying, selling, letting, moving, to help you
Everything the Business Traveller needs to know to make a better trip
We are seeking entries for the inaugural Sunday Times Best Green Companies Awards
Enjoy some wonderful inspiring wildlife moments
An interactive preview of the brand new For Your Eyes Only exhibition

Love Sudoku? Play our brand new interactive game: with added functionality and daily prizes

Are you irritable when you return from work? Drained of emotion? You could be suffering from boreout
Prepare for some shock and awe, petrol lovers. Despite the greens trying to wipe it out, the car is about to offer us the most exciting year ever
We've trawled the brochures and websites to find this summer’s best holidays for every taste and budget

Luxury French truffles, £11.99. Treat yourself today
2007/07
£57,500
South East England
2007/57
£22,950
The Midlands
2006/06
£41,995
South East England
Great car insurance deals online
£40-55k+benefits+uncapped commission
Morgan Keating
South East
£60k plus excellent benefits
Barclaycard
Stockton / Northampton
£
£55,000 - £75,000 plus bonus and benefits
Diligenta
Based in Peterborough
£45,000 - £70,000 plus bonus and benefits
Diligenta
Based in Peterborough
Globrix, the property search engine
Visit Times Online Property for homes for sale or rent
Residential development site with planning permission
£1,500,000
Mortgages, bank accounts & money transfers to help you buy abroad
Dinarobin Hotel Golf & Spa 7 nights
From £1830 per person – saving £530.
Smart prices on ATOL protected holidays
Excellent online info & holiday selection.
Walt Disney World Resort Florida SALE!
From £619 per person!
Great travel insurance deals online
Contact our advertising team for advertising and sponsorship in Times Online, The Times and The Sunday Times. Search globrix.com to buy or rent UK property.
© Copyright 2008 Times Newspapers Ltd.
This service is provided on Times Newspapers' standard Terms and Conditions. Please read our Privacy Policy.To inquire about a licence to reproduce material from Times Online, The Times or The Sunday Times, click here.This website is published by a member of the News International Group. News International Limited, 1 Virginia St, London E98 1XY, is the holding company for the News International group and is registered in England No 81701. VAT number GB 243 8054 69.
I doubt that the Family Rights campaigners are correct in their accusation that social workers are aiming to boost their adoption figures. The motivation does not sound plausible.
If there is something in the system that would bias social workers towards taking babies from their mothers, it is this:
The legal consequences to the social worker are more serious for leaving a baby in the hands of a mother who later proves to be a hazard to the baby, and less serious if the social worker makes the opposite mistake (taking a baby away from a good mother). This is especially true if the mother does not have enough money for a good lawyer.
As a result, there is a built-in incentive in the system to take babies away from poor mothers -- or more precisely, a disincentive against leaving babies with poor mothers.
The way to fix this problem is to remove the disincentive. There are many ways to do this, but I suggest offering free or partly-subsidised legal services to poor mothers.
Howard, Toronto, Canada
Hospitals have a limited number of beds available. How long would you expect a hospital to care for a heathy child at the expense of a sick child? Sometimes the risks posed by a parent are too great to contemplate a mother and baby foster placement. It is very easy to condemn in the absence of knowledge of the risk factors.
RS, Leicester,
It is a great shame that the social system in this country works on the principal of separation and pain. Every family specialist knows, that what mothers need is support, especially in the first days/weeks after the birth. Instead of taking the baby away and depriving him of the breast milk of his mother, and depriving the young mother of the once-in-a-lifetime opporunity to make mends with herself (wondering what is that "mental ilness they are talking about), they are casing more harm, not only to the unfortunate mother, but to the child, who from the first minutes of his life is living in conflict, fear and absence of his mother, which has tremendous effect on his development and subsequently, life. Social services should work for the better of the society, not figures on the paper. It is a shame. Unfortunately, in some cases, itis too late to do anything, and in the worst cases, the mothers, unable to live with the pain of separation with their children, end their lives.
Eudocia Truth, London, London
The risk of a mother harming her child is likely to be increased when the mother is unable to bond with her child. Keep them together rather than preempting the situation by guaranteeing a problem in the mother/child bonding through separation in the crucial first few days. Or perhaps this guarantees an easier path towards the adoption process?
ECC, Camberley, UK
Why wouldn't this child be safe in the hospital?
David Leslie, Perth, Scotland
Why can't the mother and child be placed in some form of foster care together. Then they could observed together before any decision was made about her "fitness" as a mother.
T, Sussex,
It is hard to understand how a baby can be taken from a mother because there could be a risk of her harming her child when everyday we learn that children who have been identified as having been hurt, in the direct sense, by a parent are too often being left living in situ with their identified tormentors to be enabled to further violated and sometimes killed.
There are many cases where the social services are making decisions regarding the care of children which are, to be polite, 'questionable'
Decisions which are almost impossible to challenge in any unbiased independent way.
In the best interest of the children, those who care for them and in public confidence in child protection in practice, there must be a Government Lead Effort to make accountability and transparency in all child protection and childcare procedures possible and to enable bona fide concerns raised in any individual ongoing child protection or child care case to be heard in a swift and independent way.
Darnthesafetynet, London, W11 1NR