Skip to main content

Is Poverty Eroding Parental Rights in Britain? The Case of Child Protection in the Early Twenty-First Century

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Philosophy and Child Poverty

Part of the book series: Philosophy and Poverty ((PPOV,volume 1))

Abstract

In recent years, the UK has been subjected to much attention concerning a practice that has been dubbed “forced adoption”. An inquiry, launched by the European Parliament Directorate general for internal policies, focused on this question. Its object was to inquire to find out whether the UK was violating Article 8 of the European Convention on the right to family life, with regards to its policies on child adoption. Indeed, Britain is the European champion in terms of numbers of children placed for adoption each year, a majority of whom are subject to a non-consensual adoption, meaning they are forcibly taken into care without parental consent and subsequently freed for plenary adoption. The motive for removing children is that they have been harmed by their parents, or since the Children Act was passed in 1989, that they are likely to suffer harm in the future, whether physical, psychological or emotional. Recent evidence suggests that a majority of children who are forcibly removed from parental care come from a background of poverty. The UK might be described as implementing child protection policies that discriminate against the poor, which could suggest the British state is violating their right to family life.

This chapter argues that poverty per se should never constitute the basis for removing children from their parents and seeks to understand the British situation, in order to see how poverty is treated in relation to child welfare in Britain. It starts with examining the historical background of social care in the UK in order to make sense of the situation of adoption without consent, and focusing on the new definition of future harm and risk prevention linked to child protection. Further on, it explores the relationship between austerity and adoption, and examines the existence of a bias against poor parents. It concludes by a philosophical discussion on parental rights.

Our deepest thanks go to our colleague Stephanie Amar-Flood for her most valuable suggestions and remarks. We are also deeply indebted to Pierre Chassagnieux and Stephanie Thomas for their help, and for their documentary film, England’s Stolen Children, Dream Way Production, for France Television, 2016.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Webster v. Norfolk CC [2009].

  2. 2.

    The 26-week time limit became statutory requirement under sections 14(2) and 32 of the Children and Families Act 2014.

  3. 3.

    See for instance Re P (A Child) [2013 and 2014] (Pacchieri case), C.Z. & Others v. Kirklees Council [2017].

  4. 4.

    See for instance the case we shall discuss further on, Y.C. v. The United Kingdom, European Court of Human Rights.

  5. 5.

    On the specific impact of legal aid cuts on family justice, see the 2013 special issue “Delivering Family Justice in Late Modern Society in the wake of Legal Aid Reform”, Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law, 35(1) and the 2017 special issue “The post-LASPO landscape: Challenges for family law”, Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law, 35(2). The Children’s commissioners’ review called on the Conservative government in 2015 to review its deep welfare cuts, voicing serious concerns about children denied access to justice, as reported in The Guardian in July 2015.

  6. 6.

    Gloucestershire County Council v. A Mother & Others (discharge of care order) [2017]. Reported in Tickle, Louise. 2017. Council apologises over unlawful removal of a child from mother. The Guardian. 28 July. https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/jul/28/council-apologises-over-unlawful-removal-of-child-from-mother. Accessed first September 2018.

  7. 7.

    C.Z. & Others v. Kirklees Council [2017]. The press was allowed to report on the case as soon as the approved judgment was released, as is shown by Patrick Foster. 2017. Parents had week-old baby taken away by social services after father heard ‘praising benefits of formula milk’. The Telegraph. 16 February. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/02/16/parents-had-week-old-baby-taken-away-social-services-father/. Accessed 6 August 2018.

  8. 8.

    Several reports by the National Audit Office have highlighted the pressures endured by the sector since 2010. See https://www.nao.org.uk/report/financial-sustainability-of-local-authorities-2018/. Accessed 6 June 2018.

  9. 9.

    The number of children referred to social services has even reached an average of 1770 per day, as revealed by data published by the Department for Education. See Bulman, May. 2018. Child referred to social services every 49 s amid rising reports of domestic violence. Independent, 11 January. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/children-social-services-domestic-abuse-violence-rise-uk-a8154261.html. Accessed 6 August 2018.

  10. 10.

    The arguments were put forward by Lady Hale and reported by Lord Justice McFarlane in his Bridget Lindley OBE Memorial Lecture 2017. Holding the risk: The balance between child protection and the right to family life. The obiter dictum referred to is Lord Templeman’s in Re KD (A Minor) [1988] AC 806.

  11. 11.

    Y.C. v. The United Kingdom, European Court of Human Rights.

  12. 12.

    According to the Trussell Trust, over a million 3-day emergency food supplies were handed out over 2016–2017, out of which 400,000 claimants were children. See https://www.trusselltrust.org/news-and-blog/latest-stats/end-year-stats/. Accessed 6 August 2018.

  13. 13.

    With the noted exception of Narveson, Jan. 2002. Respecting Persons in Theory and Practice. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.

Literature

Cases Cited

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alexandrine Guyard-Nedelec .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Mornington, AD., Guyard-Nedelec, A. (2019). Is Poverty Eroding Parental Rights in Britain? The Case of Child Protection in the Early Twenty-First Century. In: Brando, N., Schweiger, G. (eds) Philosophy and Child Poverty. Philosophy and Poverty, vol 1. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-22452-3_18

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics