Autistic child back in care after three-year search ends in adoption failure

Wednesday 23 May 2018

In what’s believed to be the first case of its kind in Jersey, an autistic child has officially been taken back into care after a three-year search to find adoptive parents ended in failure.

Two-year old ‘Thomas’ (not his real name) was taken into care in March 2014 because he had autism and his mother said she couldn’t cope.

The move was also supported by Children’s Services because he was “suffering physical and emotional harm from his mother’s association with inappropriate people, including a convicted paedophile and drug users… and because he was suffering physical and emotional harm as a result of witnessing domestic violence between his mother [and the man she was living with (not the boy’s father)].”

Later in 2014 the Royal Court ‘freed’ Thomas – a technical term meaning he could be adopted, although they were worried this might prove difficult.

At the time, the then Bailiff, Sir Michael Birt, noted: “We agree… given Thomas’ autism, adoption may not be wholly straightforward.” In his judgement he went on to say: “ We heard evidence from the social worker as to the prospects for adoption and it is clear that the Children’s Service would consider adopters from the UK if local or Channel Island adopters cannot be found.”

The situation was to be reviewed within a year, and “the social worker made it clear that the Children’s Service fully understands the need to progress the question for adoption vigorously and in early course.”

Pictured: Deputy Bailiff Tim Le Cocq, delay was  "regrettable to say the least."

Thomas was never adopted, and it was only in March this year – two years later than planned - that the case came back to Court, something the judge Deputy Bailiff Tim Le Cocq describes as “regrettable to say the least”. In his judgement he goes on to say, “It does not seem right to the Court that more than three years have passed since that order was made, three times the statutory duration...  We do not say that there are not some cases in which such a delay might be seen to be appropriate but we nonetheless express our concern in this case.”

Earlier this year the Court concluded, looking at similar cases in England, it could revoke the ‘freeing’ order and re-instate a care order – if it is acting in the child’s best interests. As a result the ‘freeing’ order has been revoked, and a full care order put in place.