M, Re

Her Honour Judge Hudson :� These proceedings concern a little girl, who I will refer to as B, who was born on 13th July 2013 and who is now nine months of age. Her mother, M as I will refer to her, is 17 years of age. She herself is subject to a Care Order, which was made some years ago in circumstances which I will touch on briefly as I deal with the chronology.�

B�s putative father, as named by M, has failed to cooperate with DNA testing to determine whether he is indeed B�s father.� He was served with notice of the proceedings, but has not sought to engage in the proceedings, making it clear to the local authority that he did not wish to do so, or to be involved with B.

Since that time B has remained in the foster placement to which she moved. B has had regular contact with M on four occasions each week. Once again, I will touch on that shortly as I deal with the chronology.

The case has come before me today for final hearing. It was listed before me on 11 th March 2014 for an issues resolution hearing, when it was evident that there was no agreed way forward in terms of B�s future placement and I therefore listed the case for a final hearing. B�s Guardian in the proceedings is Nicola Murphy. She was appointed at the outset of the proceedings and has provided two reports in the care proceedings.

The position of the parties is as follows. The local authority invites the court to conclude that the threshold criteria are established, based on a likelihood of significant harm.� A schedule of threshold findings is in the court bundle at A6. The local authority has undertaken a parenting assessment before the issue of proceedings, which did not support B�s placement in her mother�s care. The local authority�s ongoing assessment of M has not supported B�s placement in her care.�