Rosemary Bennett, Social Affairs Correspondent
Win tickets to the ultimate village fete with welly wanging and more
Children at risk of abuse or neglect face even greater danger because of a new system designed to cut costs and speed up care proceedings, the Government has been warned.
Figures seen by The Times show that since the new system was introduced last September, the number of applications to take children into care in London has dropped by 30 per cent as local authorities struggled to make it work. London was one of a dozen areas – and the biggest – chosen to pilot the new system. The Government was unable to provide data for the other pilot areas.
In some London boroughs applications to courts for “care orders”, which are legally required to take children into local authority care, have fallen by 75 per cent since the pilot began.
Ministers admit that they are aware of the drop in care order applications but say they hope that the reduction is because more children at risk are being cared for by family members – although they concede that they have no evidence of this.
Under the new rules, known as the Public Law Outline, social workers are now required to carry out extensive “preproceedings” work, gathering all the evidence needed for their case, before they apply for a care order.
Lawyers say that social workers are not properly trained to build a legal case without help from the court and fear that the prospect of the extra work without guidance is putting them off pursuing care orders.
Under the old system the case was built up once formal care proceedings were under way and, crucially, under the direction of the judge who would help social workers by telling them exactly what the court needed to see.
John Simmonds, head of policy at the British Association for Adoption and Fostering, said that the drop in care orders was worrying and criticised the decision to “rush out” the new system nationally before the pilots were properly evaluated.
“The Government should be very concerned that a large group of children are at additional risk following this drop-off in the number of proceedings. Such a fundamental change affecting highly vulnerable children being taken into care should have had greater evaluation before it was rolled out. We feel the whole thing has been rushed out,” he said.
“We have not learnt any lessons about what worked well or not so well in different pilots. We have heard anecdotally that in some pilot areas there have not been any care proceedings issued at all since the new system came into force.”
Martha Cover, a senior barrister at Coram Chambers and an expert in care proceedings, called the sharp fall in care orders alarming. “We know that the level of concern is already very high before a local authority takes action, so to see a fall of 30 per cent in applications issued is very alarming. I don’t think it is due to a 30 per cent fall in the level of risk to the children of London,” she said.
The most recent research, conducted by the University of Bristol, found that children have been known to the local authorities for some time in 91 per cent of cases in which care orders are eventually sought, with 42 per cent a result of “unplanned crisis intervention”. Those figures suggest that, even under the old system, social workers waited until the child was under serious threat before taking action.
Ms Cover said she feared that a sharp rise in the court fees to instigate care proceedings, revealed in The Times last week, could be a further deterrent. A spokeswoman for the Ministry of Justice admitted that ministers knew that there had been a drop in care orders in London but said they hoped that it was as a result of more children at risk being placed with other family members, although there was no evidence to back this up.
She said: “We are aware there has been a drop in care proceedings applications in London since the introduction of the Public Law Outline.
“New statutory guidance issued by the Department for Children, Schools and Families requires local authorities to ensure all other safe options, such as wider kinship care, have been explored before issuing an application, and this may well be having an impact on applications.”
She added that it would be some time before an evaluation of the new system had been completed.
Follow our three athletes' progress in their preparations for the London Triathlon, and pick up training tips and more
Enjoy screenings of all the classic films you love, plus take advantage of two-for-one tickets
We explore leisure activities that are safe and suitable for all of the family
Times Online's new TV show helps you make the right decisions for your pet
Read our exclusive 100 Years of Fleming and Bond interactive timeline, packed with original Times articles and reviews
The latest travel news plus the best hotels and gadgets for business travellers


Luxury French truffles, £11.99. Treat yourself today

A treasure trove of baubles, booty and stylish quests

2002/02
£59,995
The Midlands
F/1989
£36,000
Hollingworth At Ombersley
2007/57
£35,000
South East England
Great car insurance deals online
90K plus bonus plus options
Confidential
London
To £28k
Barclaycard
Various (outside London)
£
£40,000 - £50,000 + benefits
Lloyds Pharmacy
Coventry
£38k
Barclaycard
Various Locations
Live in One of London's Most Vibrant Areas
From £249,950
Beautiful Gardens w/ stunning Thames Views
Studios £33K, 1 Beds £60K, 2 beds £79K
Mortgages, bank acc & money transfers to help you buy abroad
Explore mystical Jordan
From £1030 for 7nts 4*
to USA's Most Cosmopolitan City; San Francisco!
£POA
Book Now for Winter 08/09 and Get 10% off!
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. Visit our classified services and find jobs, used cars, property or holidays. Use our dating service, read our births, marriages and deaths announcements, or place your advertisement.
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.
Hi
I am an interpreter/contact workerer/family support worker and now training to become a social worker!
Social workers do take childen kicking and screaming as it has to be done, somtimes wrongly sometimes rightly. u never knw wht is happening behind closed doors, u cnt read minds.
D, london, england
As a lawyer representing children for almost 20 years, I despair about the situation. The motives of this government in introducing the PLO, increasing fees and the undermining of children's legal representation are clearly based on an agenda which is not in the interests of our childrens welfare.
Gareth, Flintshire, UK
I have been a social worker in child protection for five years and have never snatched a child kicking and sreaming from parents in to care. I work to protect children from very abusive environments. Come and spend a day in the shoes of a child that lives with violence, abuse and neglect.
Anji Kerr , Stevenage , Herts.
As a social worker for ten years in child protection, I personally have never "snatched and dragged" children away from parents. The implication again is that the "parent" has done no wrong, but they are often abusive and/or violent. A law change won't help me feel I can't do right for doing wrong
Kate, Sheffield, Yorkshire
How terrible! Social workers now have to *prove* they need to take a child into care instead of just snatching it and dragging it kicking and screaming away from its mother. How will they meet their targets now?
Rowan, Oxford,
Children known to be at risk are not taken into care.A 10 year old, taken to hospital by parents because they were conerned IS without any previous suspicion and no proof other than the suspicion of a doctor.
The 10 year old was cared for by grandparents until a judge threw out the case. Why?
barbara, north east,