![]() |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | |
England and Wales Family Court Decisions (other Judges) |
||
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> England and Wales Family Court Decisions (other Judges) >> Portsmouth City Council v O [2014] EWFC B173 (31 July 2014) URL: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWFC/OJ/2014/B173.html Cite as: [2014] EWFC B173 |
[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
Winston Churchill Avenue Portsmouth |
||
B e f o r e :
(In Private)
IMPORTANT NOTICE
____________________
PORTSMOUTH CITY COUNCIL | Applicant | |
- and - | ||
O | Respondents |
____________________
MR. M. TOOLEY, Solicitor of Larcomes LLP, appeared on behalf of the First/Second First Respondent Mother.
MISS. Z. RUDD (instructed by Saulet Ashworth LLP) appeared on behalf of the Second Respondent Father.
MR. D. WICKS (instructed by Heyes Samuel Solicitors) appeared on behalf of the Guardian.
____________________
Crown Copyright ©
JUDGE BLACK:
"It is agreed that as a result of the facts set out below the children have suffered and are at risk of suffering significant physical harm and/or emotional harm and/or neglect. The children are at risk of significant physical harm as a result of domestic violence and abuse between Mother and the father(X) of A and B.
"On 10th August 2013 X physically assaulted The mother and A attempted to intervene. There were further reports of domestic altercations in January and July 2013. The children are at risk of being caught in the cross-fire. The mother obtained a non-molestation order on 15th August 2013 yet X was found hiding in a cupboard at the family home during an unannounced visit on 17th September 2013.
"The children have suffered and are at risk of suffering significant emotional harm from witnessing their mother being subjected to domestic abuse and violence and from Xs aggressive behaviour.
"Mother has a long history of substance misuse which places the children at risk of significant harm from neglect as a result of not being able to meet their physical and emotional needs when under the influences of substances. Mother tested positive for opiates on 4th September 2013 and 10th September 2013 and has previously failed to take her methadone prescription as prescribed having stockpiled prior to D birth.
"X abuses alcohol and becomes violent when under the influence and the children are at risk of physical harm as a result. A school attendance has historically been very poor and she is behind her peers in terms of education. This places her at risk of significant emotional harm. The local authority asserts that the children have been left unsupervised placing them at risk of physical harm. It is also reported that A takes on a caring role for her younger siblings placing them at risk of neglect and causing emotional harm to A. Mother does not accept the children were left unsupervised or that A did take a caring role for the children. Finally, that there is a history of mother entering into unsafe and harmful relationships."
The court found that the threshold to be met in respect of all four children on the basis of that agreed document.
"I feel that given Father only has care of his children twice a week it has been challenging to ascertain a fuller picture and any firm patterns that might emerge in terms of boundaries, diet, routine and basic care. From what I have been able to observe and recorded is my belief that Father would be able to parent his children to an acceptable standard but he would require on-going support as their needs change and evolve over time. SA feel that it would have been more beneficial if father had been given a period of time living here full time with the children to observe and assess his abilities and to determine whether advice and guidance given can be implemented by him."
The reason why I question whether I had seen that was that at the IRH I had two stark positions. One from the local authority, not only saying that this was now an adoption case but actually my recollection of wanting to bring the assessment to an end there and then, and the guardian on the other hand saying that the children should live with the father full time.
It is an unusual circumstance although one that is becoming more frequent in this court, where the local authority and guardian's views diverge, and certainly my view in such cases is that it is inappropriate unless it is so stark on the face of the papers that one assessment over the other has such significant merit that it is not appropriate to express an opinion at that point and for the matter to come to trial. The local authority, however, were encouraged by myself to continue the current level of arrangements until that trial took place, which they agreed to do.
"The local authority has a number of concerns about the physical safety of the children during overnight contact with Father, but agreeing to continue to facilitate the current contact and contract of expectations to be agreed before the next contact."
It is surprising that a contract of expectations had not been entered into in February when these children were placed I have to say. I would have expected that to have happened as a matter of just good practice, and it is surprising in this case that it did not occur in particular when the father is now criticised in respect of some matters which since a contract of expectations was prepared there is no evidence to show that he has not complied to the letter with what has been required of him in that document.
"Father shows a genuine emotional warmth and love towards his children and this can be seen to be reciprocated by them. Father extends his care towards to his former partner's daughter, A with whom he keeps in regular contact and ensures that C and D have contact with her. Father has been a consistent and constant figure within her life and although this court hearing does not relate to her directly I feel I want to add this to demonstrate the care and warmth he has towards the children in his care. My concern for C and D is that they have a very clear attachment to their father and I would be concerned for their emotional wellbeing should he not figure within their lives."
course nothing is cast in stone. I will leave you to sort out the details of any
appropriate prohibited steps.