Sister I mostly agree with your post, but just a few comments:
I think for a foster carer approved to keep the child on a permanent basis, then adoption is probably the best route to permanency. However adoption allowances are discretionary and not mandatory and they can be reduced or withdrawn at any time. As you probably know the LA now have a duty to offer post adoption support, but in my experience given the huge under resources of LA SSdepts, you are very unlikely to get this service. I didn't know that court fees for adoption were so high and if that is the case, then yes the LA may well have an invested interest in pushing SGOs. However there will be court fees attached to these Orders too.
You mention the child having to be "given back" because of lack of finance but there is in the SGO Regulations a sentence that says "no placement should break down because of lack of finance" and that is a very useful sentence because it could be used against the LA if necessary and if they didn't recognise this part of the law you would have to find a lawyer to go back to court for judidicial review but I don't somehow think that would be necessary because the LA lawyer would hardly want to go to court to argue that the LA were not keeping to the letter of the law!
Re: PR - you say you don't get rid of it, but it is much reduced and there are only 3 matters about which the birthparents have to be consulted:
- You cannot change the child's surname without the bps cosent.
- You cannot take the child out of the country for more than 3 months without bp's consent.
- You cannot apply for an adoption order without the consent of the bps.
Also the birthparents cannot apply to discharge the SGO so that they have the child returned to them unless they have "leave of the court" which means that a Judge would have to be convinced that the circumstances of the bps had changed drastically from the time the Order was made. There would of course also be the important issue of the length of time the child had been with you and the forming of secure attachments etc. The SGO legislation is relatively new (Jan 2006) so there is unlikely to be any legal precedents set.
Re Contact. Yes this is a sticky one. The assessor of the SGO assessment has to deal with the issue of contact in the report, and the assessor should be considering the child's
need for contact to inform their recommendation about frequency etc. I have completed many SGOs and the bps are of course asked for their views on contact and quite often they say somethinf daft like "every day" and the applicants for the SGO are of course also consulted,
but again the assessing sw
must have the courage of their convictions as too many of them ime second guess what the Judge will see as reasonable. IF it is a relative SGO (as most of them are ime) it will depend on the age of the child and his or her recall of her bparents. It's the
child's right to contact
not the right of the birthparents, but they find this too difficult a concept to understand in most cases.
The assessor of the SGO has to state if and why contact is deemed to be in the best interests of the child and this depends the age of the child and the r/ship with the bps and the applicants of the SGO. In some family situations the r/ship between the holders of the SGO and the birthmother/partner are quite good and it may be that contact is informal (though this would have to be spelled out in the SGO assessment) It is more usual for contact to be offered on a quarterly basis or x 6 per year and the usual reason is so that the child grows up
knowing the identity of her birthparents, rather than someone pointing to someone in the street when the child is about 10 and saying "that's your real mom" - contact can also be indirect, by way of sending bps annual photos and updates etc. But
yes I agree the holders of the SGO have to sort out contact themselves, although the LA can ask for a 1 year Supervision Order to go alongside the SGO to assist with contact arrangements.
Sherbear I think in your situation an SGO is probably the best route to permanency, given the family connections. However I think the guardian is misinformed. It is not a matter of "what the court will want" (that's the tail wagging the dog) the issue is what are the child's
needs and how can they best be met in her best interests. Whether the guardian was genuinely misinformed or was pushing for SGO because of the court fees as
Sister suggests, I don't know. However the guardian who is employed by CAFCASS and is independent of the LA SSD would not need to be bothered about court costs as it would not come from their budget. I would query this with the guardian and I am happy for you to share the information that I have given with her or him. It makes me really annoyed when people are given incorrect information and obviously accept it because they trust the social workers.
The other thing you might like to query with the child's sw and the guardian is the basis on which the child is placed with you now. I realise she is subject to a Care Order made in the court
but a child can only be placed with a relative for 6 weeks, before that relative has to be approved as a foster carer, otherwise the placement is illegal (Children Act 1989) Mind I do have to say that many LA sws don't keep to the letter of the law and I have been asked to approve relatives for permanent foster care when the child has been there for 6 months and in some cases a number of years!
I think the LA plan is to keep the child with you on the basis of "family care" whilst they carry out the assessment of you as a Special Guardian for the child. It's quite a lengthy and comprehensive assessment and it isn't just a matter of the sw "writing the report" They also have to carry out an assessment of
your needs including any initial financial needs i.e. purchasing baby equipment etc and any other need that you might have. The judge will not hear the case unless this Assessment of Need accompanies the SGO assessment. The other thing to bear in mind is that the application for the SGO has to be
your application - it doesn't mean you have to do anything, but sometimes LAs give the impression that it is
their application and it isn't.
I think the para about contact above will be helpful for you to read and think about and talk to the child's sw and guardian about.
Just another point on finance. Can I ask what they are paying you at the moment. The SGO Regs state that a LA should continue to pay fostering allowances for a period of 2 years. I have come across sws who have told applicants for SGOs that they will continue to pay through the child's childhood, but this is not necessarily the case. Payments for SGOs are
discretionary and the Regs mention a period of 2 years. Maybe LAs do pay throughout the child's lifetime but I would query this too. Don't forget though the Regs state that "no SGO placement should break down because of lack of finance" - keep this in mind, you might need to use it one day!!
Have just re-read your post and see that you have good r/ships with the extended family and possibly the bm? so it may be that contact can be informal so long as the bm nor anyone in the extended family is allowed to have unsupervised contact. Not sure about SSs saying they will supervise contact. As I said the only way they have the authority to do this is if they request that the court make a 1 year Supervision Order, and sws are so overloaded with work, I would be cautious about any "offers" that are being made.
Just call me an old cynic!!!
You can get info on SGOs by putting it into Google or from "British Agencies for Fostering & Adoption" (BAAF) or Fostering Network.
Sorry post so long but happy to help further if necessary.
.. 