Seven years ago, Sir James Munby, then the president of the family division of the high court, issued a highly unusual public judgment. Denouncing a “disgraceful and utterly shaming lack”, he called for an overhaul of council provision for children who need intensive support in a residential setting. Since then, the children’s commissioner for England and other senior judges have made similar criticisms.
Councils in England do not have enough places in which to look after some of the most vulnerable children for whom they are responsible. The result is that rising numbers are subjected to deprivation of liberty orders, leading to forcible detention in unregulated placements including rented flats. Last weekend, Sir James spoke up again, calling the situation a “shocking moral failure” and for it to be discussed in the run-up to next month’s election.
Use of the orders has grown 12-fold, from 102 in 2017-18 to 1,238 in 2023-24. What was once a last resort has become normalised. In one shocking case, a girl known as Becky was held in a secure room in a psychiatric hospital for eight weeks and fed through a hatch. Other young people have described frightening experiences of being physically restrained. Between 2019 and 2022, 34 children from England were placed in Scotland – long distances from their relatives and networks, including social workers. Workforce problems mean that the adults in charge of these young people often lack the right qualifications and experience.
Last year, Gillian Keegan, the education secretary, refused to appear before the family court on grounds that she had nothing to contribute on the issue of the lack of secure placements. Her department has committed £259m to fund about 50 new ones – which is nowhere near enough. Sir James is right to demand that politicians, and civil society, should take more notice.
Coming up with a viable plan for the future of social care, including a funding model, is a huge public policy challenge across the UK. The reasons for the shortage of children’s residential placements are different from those driving the rising needs of adults. But in both areas, the introduction of a market model and the decimation of council budgets have led to a situation in which public provision is inadequate and commissioners are forced to shop around with private providers for cheap deals. In severe cases, the state fails to meet its legal responsibilities while young people’s rights are violated.
This problem will take time to solve. The reasons for rising need are complex, but include poverty and the lack of family support services. Pressure on mental health services is another factor, with the NHS and councils frequently in dispute over which should take responsibility for at-risk young people. Secure placements cannot be magicked up.
The seriousness of past mistakes, including a wrongheaded faith in markets and an overreliance on foster care – leading to a loss of high-quality children’s home places – must be confronted. It should be a priority of the next government to restore funding to enable councils to meet their legal obligation to “promote the welfare” of the children they look after.
Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.
