In the matter of K (Care Order)

On 10 th February, 2014, the Court granted the Minister a final care order in respect of K (aged 3) with the support of the guardian Ms Gill Timmis and K's maternal grandmother and step-grandfather (Mr and Mrs E) who have been caring for him since March 2013. In view of the status of Mr and Mrs E in K's life and because it was in K's interests that they should have sight of all of the reports and documents filed in this case (which they understood should remain confidential), it was felt appropriate for them to be made parties to the proceedings.

The background to the case is set out in the Court's judgment of 14 th October, 2013, ( [2013] JRC 199 ) and we adopt the definitions used in that judgment. We will not set out that background again which is to be taken as read.

Sadly the mother has continued in a downward spiral. Adapting the words of Mr Gafoor of the Alcohol and Drugs Service in his report of 23 rd September, 2013, she has remained immersed in the local drugs scene and continues to engage in high risk behaviours such as overdoses and injecting fentanyl, which is 100 times stronger than heroin. The police reports show unstable and irrational conduct and indeed the mother was in custody at the time of the hearing.

The mother's ability to commit to structured contact with K has deteriorated to the point that she has stopped attending, the last supervised contact taking place on the 23 rd September, 2013. She had failed to instruct Mr English who had been appointed to represent her. She had not filed a position statement or responded to the threshold document or attended any of the hearings since the interim care order was granted. Mr English attended the commencement of the hearing but as he had no instructions he was released from the Court.

Although the mother had failed to engage in the proceedings, Ms Rosena Connor, the social worker, had been able to meet her on 16 th January, 2014. At that meeting the mother confirmed that she agreed that K should remain in the care of Mr and Mrs E. She expressed disagreement over the restrictions on contact but had not contacted the Children's Service in order for assessments of her wellbeing to be made for the purpose of determining whether supervised contact should resume.