2nd Report - Human Rights of Children in the Social Care System in England

Although the UK has signed and ratified the UNCRC, England has not incorporated the Convention, while Wales has indirectly incorporated it, and Scotland has directly incorporated it into Scots Law. This creates inconsistency in the application of UNCRC protections for children in care and those receiving support from the children’s social care system across the UK. (Conclusion, Paragraph 33)

As mentioned by many stakeholders, including the Children’s Commissioner for England, the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, and UNICEF, incorporation would give the UNCRC teeth, increasing protections for children in England, and enhancing accountability of public authorities. (Conclusion, Paragraph 34)

Incorporation of the UNCRC could be very beneficial for children in care and children receiving support from the children’s social care system. Benefits could include the promotion of care standards and the creation of further avenues for dealing with breaches of human rights. (Conclusion, Paragraph 35)

The government should take steps to fully incorporate the UNCRC into domestic law in England. Until full incorporation takes place, the government should consider short-term measures, such as developing mandatory child-rights impact assessment procedures for legislation and policies relevant to children and introducing a duty on ministers to have due regard to the UNCRC when exercising their functions. In particular, the government should also consider measures to ensure that children’s voices are heard in decisions affecting them, ensuring compliance with Article 12 UNCRC. Such measures could include creating a statutory requirement for local councils to set up Corporate Parenting Boards with the participation of people with care experience. (Recommendation, Paragraph 36) 98 Disabled Children’s Social Care

The disabled children’s social care framework is complex and difficult to navigate. In line with the Law Commission’s recommendations, we agree that there should be a single, comprehensive piece of statutory guidance on disabled children’s social care law, clearly setting out rights and responsibilities of disabled children, families, and local authorities. This guidance should be produced in consultation with local authorities, disabled children, their families and their carers, as well as sector organisations and experts in the field. (Conclusion, Paragraph 47)

We agree with the Law Commission: the definition of disability in the Children Act 1989 is outdated. It contains stigmatising language and it does not match modern definitions of disability used in other areas of law. The definition should be modernised and made more inclusive by using the language of the Equality Act 2010, in line with the proposals of the Law Commission. (Recommendation, Paragraph 52)

To ensure that disabled children and their families are aware that they are entitled to an assessment of their needs, the duty on local authorities to provide one should be clear and explicit. We agree with the Law Commission’s recommendation to introduce a single duty to assess the social care needs of disabled children, arising where it appears to the local authority that a child is disabled and may have needs for care and support resulting from their disability. The single statutory guidance for disabled children’s social care should clarify the rights and duties in relation to these assessments. (Recommendation, Paragraph 58)

Assessments of children’s needs must also effectively identify neurodivergence, and must lead to the provision of adequate support to meet the needs of neurodivergent children. (Recommendation, Paragraph 59)

Ensuring that disabled children are safe from harm is, of course, extremely important. In some circumstances, such as where there is evidence of risk of harm or abuse to the child, a child protection approach may be appropriate and, indeed, necessary. (Conclusion, Paragraph 62)

However, conducting assessments of disabled children’s needs only through a child protection lens, rather than a support lens, can lead to the stigmatisation of carers and the failure to provide adequate support to children who might need it. The government must work with local authorities to ensure the single statutory guidance clearly sets out how to effectively conduct assessments, with expected practice standards for supporting all disabled children, striking the correct and consistent balance between child protection and support. (Recommendation, Paragraph 63) 99

The lack of national eligibility criteria for the provision of support to disabled children means that some children are able to receive the support they need while others with similar needs are unable to receive support simply because of where they live. We support the Law Commission’s recommendation for the introduction of national eligibility criteria to assess the support that disabled children require. (Recommendation, Paragraph 68)

In introducing national eligibility criteria, the government must consult widely with children, their families and their carers, and local authorities as well as sector organisations and experts in the field, to ensure that the criteria adequately meet the needs of disabled children. In order to do so, it is imperative that significantly more data is collected in relation to how disabled children are assessed. Adequate funding and guidance should also be made available to ensure the correct application of the eligibility criteria once they are in place. (Recommendation, Paragraph 69) Kinship Care

We have heard evidence about the considerable benefits of keeping children within family networks. We believe that the government must emphasise the importance of loving kinship arrangements and support them whenever possible. (Conclusion, Paragraph 82)

We welcome the government’s recent and planned reforms and focused work in the area of kinship care. However, efforts must not end there. Children should be able to stay within family networks wherever possible, having due regard to the child’s best interests and welfare. The experiences and expertise of kinship families must be given proper consideration when decisions are being made about changes to the system. (Conclusion, Paragraph 83)

We also welcome the Law Commission’s project on legal reform of kinship care. We particularly welcome the Law Commission’s plans to investigate the benefits and drawbacks of introducing a bespoke order to recognise, support, and regulate kinship care. Such an order could assist in ensuring the availability of better avenues to support carers, and a more comprehensive framework for safeguarding and protecting children. We urge the government to thoroughly consider the outcomes of this project as soon as practically possible after publication. We ask the government to keep us informed of this process, and to write to us when a response to the proposed reforms is published. (Recommendation, Paragraph 84) 100

Kinship carers and the children they care for in England are often in need of financial support, and inconsistent provision of that support can place them in significant difficulties. This is especially the case when informal arrangements are in place. (Conclusion, Paragraph 92)

We welcome the Kinship Allowance Pilot, and we welcome the initiative by some local authorities to provide financial support to kinship carers prior to, and outside of, the Pilot. But efforts must not end there. The majority of children in kinship care in England are outside the scope of this Pilot, and their needs must be addressed urgently. It is not reasonable to expect these families to wait for years before being able to access further support. We urge the government to consider introducing interim measures to alleviate pressures on all kinship families, including a standard financial allowance, as well as access to parental leave. (Recommendation, Paragraph 93) Accommodation

We agree with the government that the children’s social care market is fundamentally broken. There is a serious sufficiency crisis across the country, leading to children not being placed in accommodation that supports their needs. (Conclusion, Paragraph 106)

We welcome the expansion of Regional Care Cooperatives (RCCs), alongside the suite of changes to combat care market profiteering. While it is too early to tell whether these measures will be effective, these are steps in the right direction. Alongside these measures, which must be implemented at greater scale and pace, the government must work with local authorities to ensure that accommodation is made available in areas that need it, and that every child is offered accommodation that supports their needs. In this regard, the government should also consider the merits of giving local authorities powers to purchase and operate homes in cooperation with RCCs. (Recommendation, Paragraph 107)

Children are too often placed in accommodation far from family and friends. Failure to promote contact with siblings and other family members could amount to a breach of children’s rights to private and family life under Article 8 ECHR. (Conclusion, Paragraph 116)

There must be greater emphasis on the need to maintain and prioritise stable, lifelong relationships. The availability and promotion of contact with family members and friends, where safe and in the best interests of the child, must be the default approach. (Recommendation, Paragraph 117)

We welcome the changes introduced by the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Act 2026 to require local authorities to allow reasonable contact between children in care and their siblings but note that such a flexible 101 standard could be interpreted narrowly by local authorities with limited resources. The government must work with local authorities to ensure this does not happen, by, for example, making available guidance setting out the expected focus on the promotion of close relationships. (Recommendation, Paragraph 118)

While we understand that it can be very difficult for local authorities to arrange suitable accommodation for all children in their care, it is never acceptable to place a child in an illegal home. (Conclusion, Paragraph 130)

Unregulated accommodation, including caravans, holiday rentals or AirBnBs, do not allow for formal inspections or scrutiny. Such settings are unlawful, unsafe, and represent a serious failure to protect children. They are also not good value for public money. We are concerned that the situation may create opportunities for potential financial misconduct. The scope for such misconduct must be urgently assessed, and steps taken to close any loopholes and investigate any cases which may come to light. (Conclusion, Paragraph 131)

We welcome the Government’s renewed focus on expanding fostering. Long- term solutions will involve systematic changes to ensure loving homes for all children in care. However, the accommodation of children in illegal homes is a problem that cannot wait. (Conclusion, Paragraph 132)

We agree with the Children’s Commissioner: the government and Ofsted must sort this out and must move children to suitable regulated accommodation as a matter of urgency. We also agree that measures that should be explored include increasing efforts to drive up local authority supply of placements through adequate funding, carrying out tougher inspections, and tackling delays in the registration process for homes. (Recommendation, Paragraph 133)

We have heard evidence that many children do not feel safe or do not have their needs met whilst in so-called supported accommodation. Many of these children are legally looked after but not receiving day-to-day care. While the new regulatory and inspection regime introduces positive changes to scrutiny and oversight, it does not guarantee that children in supported accommodation will receive the same level of care as those who are not in such settings. (Conclusion, Paragraph 143)

We agree with the Children’s Commissioner for England and with the recommendation made in the 2022 Independent Review of Children’s Social Care that a universal set of standards of care should be introduced and applied to all settings of the children’s social care framework, including supported accommodation settings. Additionally, children in supported accommodation settings must not live in shared accommodation with adults. (Recommendation, Paragraph 144) 102

We appreciate that in certain circumstances, for welfare reasons, children in care may be deprived of their liberty. But every effort should be employed to offer support to children before depriving them of their liberty. Deprivation of liberty must be a measure of last resort, for as short a period as possible, and should follow the strict requirements set out in law. Existing frameworks for deprivation of liberty should be strictly followed, with adequate legal, health, and social care support provided. (Recommendation, Paragraph 155)

The consequences for children in care of the Supreme Court’s recent changes to the law on deprivation of liberty should be kept carefully under review. It is crucial that children who are held in conditions akin to confinement are not deprived of appropriate safeguards. (Recommendation, Paragraph 156)

We welcome the fact that the majority of missing children have now been found. However, we continue to be extremely concerned about the fact that some children who went missing from asylum hotels in previous years remain missing. (Conclusion, Paragraph 164)

Until all missing children and young people are found, the government should regularly publish data about the missing children and, where possible, make public any guidance shared with local networks. (Recommendation, Paragraph 165)

The government should also make clear what specific action is being taken to locate these children, to investigate the causes for them going missing, and to avoid unaccompanied asylum-seeking children going missing in the future. The Home Office should update us every three months with details of efforts to locate the children who remain missing. We understand two children are still missing. (Recommendation, Paragraph 166)

The duty on local authorities to provide support and accommodation to children in need in their area, imposed by the Children Act 1989, extends to asylum-seeking children, and requires that children be provided with accommodation that suits their needs. Hotels must not be used to house unaccompanied asylum-seeking children, and we welcome the government’s commitment to not place children in such accommodation. (Conclusion, Paragraph 167) Criminalisation of children in care

Whilst criminal sanctions may be appropriate in some cases, children and young people with care experience are disproportionately at risk of criminalisation. Data we have seen shows that care-experienced young people constitute nearly half of the population in youth custody, and they are ten times more likely to receive an immediate custodial sentence. 103 Challenging behaviour that would not normally lead to criminalisation outside the social care environment often results in children ending up in the criminal system due to lack of support and guidance. (Conclusion, Paragraph 178)

The government must work with local authorities, law enforcement professionals and other relevant stakeholders, to address the root causes and drivers of the overrepresentation of children and young people with care experience in the criminal system. These include poor practices, early police contact, and a lack of understanding of how trauma and adversity can impact the lives of children with care experience. Special attention should be paid to tackling the overrepresentation of children with a black or mixed ethnic background and neurodivergent children. (Recommendation, Paragraph 179)

The review of the National Protocol on Reducing Unnecessary Criminalisation of Looked-After Children and Care Leavers is a welcome step, although its publication is already late. The government should consider placing it on a statutory footing, to ensure that local authorities and key agencies apply it consistently across the country. (Recommendation, Paragraph 180) Ill-treatment and deaths of children

We have seen evidence that children in need, a group that includes children in care and disabled children, are four times more likely to die due to deliberately inflicted injury, abuse or neglect than children without any social care involvement. While we acknowledge that Children and Adolescent Mental Health Services are facing unprecedented strain, this reality is profoundly alarming and urgent action is required. (Conclusion, Paragraph 199)

In line with recommendations made by the Children’s Commissioner for England and the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, there should be a change in the law to give children equal protection from physical assault to adults. The defence of reasonable chastisement or punishment to a charge of assault on a child should be removed, bringing England in line with the rest of Great Britain. (Recommendation, Paragraph 200)

This change in the law would be of particular relevance to children in care, because there would be increased protections for children before they enter the care system, potentially allowing for concerns in home environments to be identified and flagged to local authorities at an earlier stage. Further, there would be increased protections for children leaving care or moving across Great Britain. (Conclusion, Paragraph 201) 104

We have heard evidence about the inadequate provision of mental health support and care in social care settings, which can be one of the contributing causes for self-inflicted injuries and deaths. The government must tackle this as a matter of urgency and ensure that all children with social care involvement receive appropriate mental health support. In developing solutions, we urge the Government to consider the Children’s Commissioner’s recommendations, which include a focus on prevention and early intervention, as well as better integration between services. (Recommendation, Paragraph 202)

We have heard some concerns about the varying quality of reviews of deaths of children in care. The government should investigate these concerns to ensure that safeguarding partners understand their role in notifying relevant authorities of children’s deaths, and that reviews are undertaken where appropriate to investigate causes of death and to take appropriate action when shortcomings are discovered. (Recommendation, Paragraph 206) The ‘care cliff’

Upon becoming adults, children leaving care face an abrupt “care cliff”, where support ends and relationships are lost. This can have severe and lasting consequences that affect young people with care experience into adulthood. We welcome the announced changes to increase support available to care leavers, including the Staying Close national offer. (Conclusion, Paragraph 215)

In addition to such changes, the government should introduce a discretion to extend support past age-based cut off points in circumstances where the needs of an individual require it to ensure a smooth transition into adulthood. In particular, targeted support should be made available in relation to housing, health, education, and employment. (Recommendation, Paragraph 216)

We heard first-hand testimony about the difference that the Archway Hub has made in the lives of care leavers in Leeds. The government should consider working with local authorities to expand Care Leaver Services across England, so that care leavers in other areas can receive support to a similar standard as the support provided by the Archway Hub. The provision of specialist services and support, which could include mentoring schemes, leisure activities, and courses for developing skills, could help tackle considerable issues for care leavers, such as unemployment and lack of access to further education. (Recommendation, Paragraph 217) 105

Many stakeholders have told us about the discrimination that people with care experience face once they leave care. We heard this testimony with deep concern. Although there would be potential merits in recognising care experience as a protected characteristic in the Equality Act 2010, we recognise that there would also be challenges raised by doing so, for example in relation to adequately covering the experiences of people in kinship care, and to having proper regard to those who do not wish to be labelled as care experienced or have their care experience disclosed. Any review of this area should thoroughly consider both the merits and challenges involved, in wide consultation with the sector and relevant people. (Conclusion, Paragraph 228)

The government must urgently explore concrete options for addressing discrimination against people with care experience, including the provision of human rights training to those involved in providing public services, with a particular focus on tackling discrimination, as well as improvements to mechanisms for holding public bodies to account when discrimination against care leavers takes place. (Recommendation, Paragraph 229) Complaints mechanisms

Complaints mechanisms exist to provide people in care with means to address issues that arise in the provision of care and support. But we have heard that these mechanisms can be complex, slow, and ineffective. (Conclusion, Paragraph 247)

People in care, their carers, care leavers, and people receiving support from the children’s social care system often find it difficult or do not know how to secure legal advice and advocacy services, and they are often afraid of retaliation from providers. This seriously affects their ability to enforce their rights. (Conclusion, Paragraph 248)

As a first step to address the complexity of the complaints system, the government must work with children, care leavers, their families, local authorities, the Children’s Commissioner, the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman, and other relevant stakeholders to raise awareness about children’s rights and the existing complaints processes to enforce them. To make it easier to navigate the complaints procedure, we have produced a flowchart (Annex D) indicating the main steps involved in raising complaints. (Recommendation, Paragraph 249)

There should be a no wrong door policy for receiving complaints related to the children’s social care system: if a complaint about the provision of care and support is not within the scope of the body receiving it, this body 106 should either automatically direct the complaint to the appropriate body or direct the complainant to the right channels in an adequate timeframe. (Recommendation, Paragraph 250)

The Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman has requested to be given the power to self-initiate investigations and the duty to monitor compliance with complaints standards. The government should urgently consider these proposed reforms to the role of the LGSCO with the aim of increasing the effectiveness of complaints mechanisms and the redress provided when problems are found. (Recommendation, Paragraph 251)

Independent Reviewing Officers (IROs) should be part of a system that ensures that children have their human rights respected whilst in care. However, we have heard that IROs sometimes struggle to challenge local authorities with independence. We note with concern evidence we have received suggesting a low number of referrals from IROs. We are also concerned that the membership organisation for IROs has told us that Officers have been bullied, threatened with disciplinary action, or sacked for raising legitimate challenges in relation to children’s rights. If this is taking place, it is absolutely unacceptable. (Conclusion, Paragraph 256)

The government must ensure that local authorities understand the need for robust independence of IROs, making clear through relevant guidance that victimisation must never be tolerated. (Recommendation, Paragraph 257)

The Children’s Commissioner, when investigating the effectiveness of complaints mechanisms and advocacy services, should scrutinise the extent of IROs’ independence and effectiveness across the country. Ofsted should also consider this when undertaking inspections, ensuring that local authorities are complying with their duties in relation to complaints mechanisms. (Recommendation, Paragraph 258)

Children’s right to independent advocacy must be strengthened. Although there is a statutory entitlement to advocacy services, many individuals are unaware of this or unable to secure advocacy in an appropriate timeframe. We support the recommendation of the Independent Review of Children’s Social Care for the implementation of an opt-out legal right to advocacy to all children in care, to automatically connect children with an advocate as soon as they are eligible for one. (Recommendation, Paragraph 264)

Children in care and those with care experience are particularly vulnerable to financial instability and legal aid is crucial to allow them access to justice. The Government must urgently act to increase provision in legal aid deserts. Where legal aid should be available in theory, it must be available in practice. Provision shortages must not constitute a barrier to the ability of children in care and those with care experience to access justice. (Recommendation, Paragraph 269) 107