When a local authority carries out a care assessment to determine the needs of a child, the principal object, which must remain in focus at all times, is the child and his or her needs.

Recently, the court heard a case which involved an autistic child with learning difficulties and health problems. The child’s mother was struggling to cope with looking after him at home and a care assessment was ordered to be carried out.

The assessment found that the mother was having such difficulty coping with the boy that her mental and physical health were being impaired. It concluded that the child should be moved to a boarding school which, having previously assessed him, would be able to cope with him.

The local authority’s education and social services panel met some months later and a second assessment was prepared by a social worker. This concluded that the initial assessment had been unduly influenced by the mother’s claim that she was unable to cope and recommended that an additional support package (largely undefined) be given to enable the child to remain at home.

The mother applied for a judicial review of the decision on her son’s behalf, contesting it on several grounds, but most particularly because the local authority had failed to consider the educational, health and social care interests of the child.

The court agreed that the initial care assessment could be considered to place undue emphasis on the needs of the mother rather than the child, but was of the view that the second assessment’s conclusion, that the ‘package of support’ was preferable for the child to a residential placement, was seriously flawed, especially as the package of support to be provided was ‘woolly’ and largely undefined.

At issue here was not only the extent to which the local authority had properly considered the needs of the child - which is their primary duty in such cases - but also the extent to which it had made a defensible case that its care plan met the child’s needs.

Says Paul Motley, 'Local authorities will often suggest plans which avoid residential placements in order to save costs. Where a residential placement is in the child’s best interests, the decision can be fought. A lack of a clear and coherent support strategy should also be called into question as, in practice, vague promises of ‘support packages’ can often fail to amount to much.'

If you are not getting the support you require from your local authority, contact us for advice.