Reported case: Prospective Adopters v A Local Authority and Ors [2025] EWFC 362 (B) 17th April 2025

We represented two children, through their Children’s Guardian, in complex adoption proceedings concerning their long-term future. These proceedings concluded with the court determining that it was in the children’s best interests to be adopted, despite the significant progress made by their birth mother since the earlier Care and Placement orders were made.

Concerns about the Local Authority’s conduct

Throughout the proceedings, the court raised serious concerns about the Local Authority’s approach following the making of the care and placement orders. There had been a serious data breach which could have compromised the children’s placement, and the judge was critical of the Local Authority’s failure to comply with earlier court directions.

Specific issues included delays in life story work, the failure to arrange contact in a way that met the children’s needs, and the lack of proper risk-assessed consideration of sharing photos and videos with the birth mother. The Local Authority also failed to facilitate a meeting between the prospective adopters and the birth mother, despite both parties wishing this to take place.

The Local Authority’s approach was described as lacking the necessary care, emphasising that the children deserved better from those responsible for supporting their welfare.

Birth mother’s progress

Since the placement order was made, the birth mother had made extensive changes to her circumstances. She had stopped using drugs and entered into a more stable relationship. She had also given birth to another child, who remained safely in her care.

Her commitment to change was recognised by the court, and she maintained a dignified approach throughout the proceedings. She asked the court not to make adoption orders and sought the return of the children to her care following a planned transition.

The court’s welfare evaluation

In considering the children’s long-term needs, the court looked carefully at all options. Although the court recognised the mother's progress, it concluded, with the assistance of the guardian’s compelling evidence, that the children required long-term security and stability that could not be met by a return home.

It was therefore decided that adoption orders were the best option for the children’s welfare. The court supported twice-yearly letterbox contact and a remotely facilitated meeting between the prospective adopters and the birth mother.

Conclusion

This was an emotionally sensitive case involving significant issues around Local Authority practice and a mother’s genuine attempts to change her life and avoid a the draconian nature of an adoption order being made. The court ultimately determined that adoption best protected the children’s welfare, while ensuring appropriate ongoing indirect contact.

Our clients were represented by Head of our Hammersmith Family team, Charlotte Burns, with Tahmina Rahman of 1 Garden court instructed as counsel.