Summary: Miss X complains about the decision to remove her daughter for a week and place her with her maternal grandmother. She says this disrupted her daughter’s normal routine and caused them both considerable distress. The Council acted following another report of Miss X’s daughter witnessing domestic abuse. The Council acted appropriately to safeguard the child and there is no fault in its actions.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains the Council removed her daughter from her care and placed her with her maternal grandmother for a week. She says that during this week she could not have unsupervised contact with her daughter and her daughter was also not allowed to see her father.
2. Miss X says this disrupted her child and caused them both considerable distress.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), 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. As part of the investigation, I have:
• considered the complaint and the documents provided by the complainant;
• made enquiries of the Council and considered the comments and documents the Council provided;
• discussed the issues with the complainant;
• sent my draft decision to both the Council and the complainant and taken account of their comments in reaching my final decision.

Back to top

What I found

6. Miss X is the mother of B, a young child. She is estranged from B’s father, Mr Z.
7. Case notes indicate a history of domestic abuse by Mr Z. B has witnessed many incidents. As a result, social care has been involved with the family for a number of years. Miss X lived in another area until June 2016. That local authority had involvement with the family and a child protection plan was in place. The other local authority had also undertaken a Public Law Outline (PLO) meeting due to concerns about the emotional harm caused to B.
8. Mr Z was not living with Miss X and B when he visited them in August 2018. B witnessed a violent incident which resulted in Miss X calling the police. The police notified social care who took action to safeguard B.
9. A strategy discussion meeting took place on 3 September 2018. It identified that B was at risk and a safety plan should be put in place. The main concern was that B should not be present with both parents together.
10. At a legal planning meeting on 5 September, Miss X agreed to the safety plan which stated B should live with her grandmother. It also stated that contact between B and Miss X should be supervised and that Mr Z should not have contact with B. Both Miss X and B went to live with B’s grandmother.
11. The Council held a PLO meeting on 12 September. Miss X and Mr Z were in attendance. The meeting discussed the concerns for B and that the Council felt nothing had changed in the parents’ behaviour to ensure she was not at risk of harm. Amendments to the safety plan were agreed. Mr Z was able to have contact with B and Miss X was able to return home with B.
12. Miss X and Mr Z attended an Initial Child Protection Conference (ICPC) on 20 September. Discussion took place about the concerns for B which were the parents not keeping her safe and protecting her from witnessing domestic abuse; the parents use of drugs and the impact of this on B; and B’s dental hygiene.
13. The ICPC concluded that B was suffering significant harm and was made the subject of a child protection plan.

Analysis

14. The family has a history with children’s services in this authority and another authority where they previously lived. This situation arose after Mr Z was abusive to Miss X and the police were called. The Council was concerned about the impact on B of seeing her father being abusive towards her mother.
15. “Working Together to Safeguard Children” is government guidance for local authorities to protect the welfare of children. It states a child centred approach is fundamental and means the focus of any decision should be the child. It states that whatever the form of abuse or neglect, practitioners should put the needs of children first when determining what action to take.
16. The voice of the child is paramount and the Council spoke to B about her situation.
17. I am satisfied the Council’s actions in this case were carried out to ensure the welfare of B. The documents provided show a history of domestic abuse and concerns about the impact of this on B. This incident required the Council to act and it did so promptly and appropriately.
18. A safety plan was agreed following a PLO meeting. The Council decided moving B to the care of her grandmother for a week was appropriate until a more permanent plan could be put in place. Miss X was able to stay with her daughter for this week, though all contact was supervised.
19. I have carefully considered the notes of the strategy meeting, PLO meeting and ICPC. All indicate that Council had at the centre of its concerns the welfare of B. I note Miss X’s view that she considered it unnecessary and that B was upset because she was unable to see Mr Z for a week. However, I am not persuaded this was as a result of any fault by the Council. The Council properly considered all the factors and then used its professional judgement to decide the appropriate action. The requirement to live at the grandmother’s house was for a week until a full child protection plan could be agreed and implemented. Miss X and Mr Z were involved in the meetings and they were given a chance to make their views known. I have not seen any evidence of fault in how the Council carried out its duty to protect to B.

Back to top

Final decision

20. I will now complete my investigation as there is no evidence of fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman