Significant Harm - Five Key Points

Children are taken into State care under section 31 of the Children Act 1989. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1989/41/section/31

Think about the wording of section 31.

'A court may only make a care order or supervision order if it is satisfied—

(a)that the child concerned is suffering, or is likely to suffer, significant harm; and

(b)that the harm, or likelihood of harm, is attributable to—

(i)the care given to the child, or likely to be given to him if the order were not made, not being what it would be reasonable to expect a parent to give to him;'

How does a parent defend herself against 'likely to suffer significant harm'?

1. Although the vast majority of the 70,000+ children in ‘care’ are from the lower socio-economic groups, there is little or no evidence that poorer parents are worse parents or are more likely to put their children at risk of ‘significant harm’ from which they need protection.

2. But in terms of social inequality, poor children are at risk of ‘significant harm’ from poorer diets, housing, education, life chances and lower life expectancy. There is no help for this.

3. A child found by the Court to be at risk of significant harm, may be placed in care, where the State takes over responsibility for his/her welfare. We know that an experience of care frequently leads to significant harm to the child/young adult, and to the parents who were not given sufficient support.

4. Many children rescued from ‘significant harm’ are in turn abused and harmed by the State, their familial links broken, their roots cut asunder, their education abysmal.

5. If we want to protect children from ‘significant harm, let’s adopt a public health approach to supporting parents who experience problems with mental health, substance abuse, or domestic violence and give them the support that wealthier parents have. Visit www.socialworkwithchildrenandfamilies.org for research on policy and practice relating to significant harm and care.