Summary: The Council did not tell Mr X and his wife that a pre-birth plan stipulated he was not allowed to stay in hospital with his wife after his child was born which caused considerable distress. The Council has already apologised and taken steps to address the issue with the officer involved, which is an appropriate response for the injustice caused. The Ombudsman makes no further recommendation to remedy the fault.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I have called Mr X, complains about the Council’s actions around putting in place a pre-birth plan before the birth of his child. The Council did not tell Mr X and his wife that the plan stipulated he was not allowed to stay in hospital with his wife when his child was born. Mr X says he was unable to support his wife or make alternative arrangements to help her in his absence. Mr X feels the Council’s apology for its oversight does not adequately remedy the distress and upset caused to his family. Mr X wants the Council to take further action to discipline the social worker that made the mistake and reimburse the costs he incurred in seeking legal advice.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe:

• the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council, or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

3. We cannot investigate a complaint if it is about a personnel issue. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5/5a, paragraph 4, as amended)

4. If we are satisfied with a council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I have spoken to Mr X and considered the information he has provided in support of his complaint.
6. I have considered information the Council has provided in response to enquiries.
7. I have written to Mr X and the Council with my draft decision and considered any comments received.

Back to top

What I found

What happened

8. The Council became involved when Mr X’s wife became pregnant. Mr X has a conviction for an offence which means the Council must consider the risk he may pose to his unborn child.
9. The Council completed a pre-birth plan to help ensure any risks Mr X might pose to his family and/or others while his wife was in hospital giving birth, were mitigated. This included limiting the amount of time Mr X was allowed to spend in the maternity ward after his child was born.
10. Mr X and his wife’s child was born on a Friday afternoon in March 2019. Hospital staff informed Mr X shortly after the birth that he would have to leave the maternity ward in accordance with a pre-birth plan the Council had shared with the hospital. Mr X and his wife were unaware of the content of the pre-birth plan. Although Mr X and his wife were very distressed, Mr X complied with the hospital’s request and left the maternity ward two hours after his child was born.
11. Mr X could not contact the Social Worker that had been dealing with him and his wife after he left the maternity ward. Mr X contacted the Council’s out of hours service to seek further information about the content of the pre-birth plan. Mr X also contacted a solicitor for legal advice.
12. The Council’s out of hours service informed Mr X that he could return to the hospital to collect his wife and child when they were discharged. Mr X returned the following day and was informed by hospital staff that they could not discharge his wife and child until they received clearance from the Council. Mr X says hospital staff told him this clearance might not occur until after the weekend. Mr X contacted the Council’s out of hours service again and was advised he was able to take his wife and child home provided the hospital confirmed they were fit for medically discharge. Mr X took his wife and child home shortly afterwards. Mr X had by this point spent just over 24 hours apart from his wife and child.

Mr X’s complaint to the Council

13. Mr X raised concerns about the Council’s actions the week after his wife and child came home. The Council gave Mr X a copy of the pre-birth plan and the Social Worker involved personally apologised to Mr X and his wife for the distress caused by their mistake in not sharing the pre-birth plan beforehand. The Social Worker’s Manager also met with Mr X and his wife to apologise for the error. Mr X says the Manager confirmed during the meeting that the Social Worker had been negligent.
14. Mr X complained to the Council about what had happened when his wife had given birth. He was unhappy the Council had failed to share the contents of the pre-birth plan with him and his wife. He said his wife had been extremely distressed when he was made to leave the hospital – she had been exhausted from childbirth and had no other support to rely on during the first night with their new-born baby. Mr X felt the apology from the Social Worker and their Manager did not sufficiently remedy the distress and upset caused.
15. The Council responded to Mr X’s concerns under stage one of its complaint procedure. The Council apologised again for the mistake in not sharing the pre-birth plan and for the distress this had caused. The Council explained the issue had been addressed with the Social Worker via their Manager’s supervision to improve this area of their practice. The Council also noted the Social Worker was no longer working on Mr X and his wife’s case. The Council offered a further meeting with the Social Worker’s Manager to discuss any outstanding concerns Mr X and his wife might have.
16. Mr X remained dissatisfied and escalated his complaint to stage two of the Council’s procedure. Mr X said he felt the Social Worker involved had been negligent and he wanted the Council to take disciplinary action. Mr X wanted the Council to reimburse the costs he had incurred in obtaining legal advice when he was asked to leave the maternity ward. He also wanted the Council to conclude its involvement with his family by closing the child protection plan his child was subject to.
17. The Council responded and explained how it had worked with the Social Worker to improve their practice following the oversight in Mr X’s case. The Council accepted it had previously agreed to work with Mr X and his wife to devise the pre-birth plan and apologised for not doing this. The Council explained it did not consider disciplinary action against the Social Worker was required in this case. The Council apologised again for the distress caused to Mr X and his wife. It said that it would not reimburse his legal costs because Mr X had made the choice to seek advice from a solicitor. The Council also explained it could not close the child protection case for Mr X’s child as this decision fell to a multi-agency panel.

Analysis

18. The Council had a statutory duty to consider the risk Mr X might pose to his unborn child. Mr X and his wife knew from their previous involvement with the Council to expect there would be a pre-birth plan for when Mr X’s wife went into labour.
19. I am satisfied the Council took appropriate steps to remedy its fault. It has met with Mr X and his wife and the Social Worker involved has personally apologised for the error, and since worked with their manager to improve this area of their practice. These are the types of remedy the Ombudsman would expect a Council to provide in such circumstances. I also agree that it would not be appropriate for the Council to offer to reimburse Mr X’s legal costs. I am not persuaded Mr X had to take legal advice in order to regain access to his family given the length of time for which the family was separated.

Back to top

Final decision

20. I have completed my investigation with a finding the Council has sufficiently remedied the fault in this case.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman