LFYP and Matrix Chambers Discussion Event - Care Matters: Assessing the Green Paper and Making It Work - An Overview
Lawyers for Young People (“LFYP”) is a legal service based in Colchester law firm, Fisher Jones Greenwood LLP, a large firm well known for its commitment to social welfare law.
LFYP was set up in early 2006 when the LSC, as a national pilot, awarded the first and only Not-For-Profit Contract to a commercial law firm. The LSC, and in particular the Cambridge office, has been extremely supportive of this initiative and its goal of improving access to the law for vulnerable young people.
Although the aim of LFYP is to improve access to the law for vulnerable young people generally, there is particular focus on the legal problems faced by young people in the care system, those leaving care and those needing statutory services. Currently, children facing care proceedings automatically have a Solicitor and usually, a Guardian. However, years later, when a child has been in care for some time, accessing a lawyer is a huge problem. This is because:-
- This group face considerable social, emotional and physical barriers in accessing the law; and
- There are an insufficient number of lawyers in the UK focusing on this area of work.
It is this gap in service provision within the law that LFYP wish to highlight.
As at March 2006, there were 60,300 Looked After children. As at February 2005, there were 385,900 Children in Need in England. It is well established that children in care persistently underachieve in many areas. As they are often socially isolated, it is imperative that easily accessible legal services are developed to support them in an effort to achieve early resolution of problems through early intervention. It may well be that some of the “social problems” young people from a care background later encounter, can be avoided if time and resources are allocated to ensuring problems are addressed at the earliest possible stage.
Some examples of the types of cases LFYP deal with include:-
- proposed change of placement against a young persons wishes
- breakdown in sibling / parent contact post Care Order
- young person accommodated under s.20 CA 89, where no one is exercising parental responsibility
- monitoring the extent to which Social Services are complying with their statutory responsibilities when young people leave care
- assisting young people wanting services under s.17 CA 89, and/or needing to be accommodated under s.20 CA 89.
The clients are always young (often 13-16 years) and always vulnerable. Clients usually have a history of neglect and/or abuse, often have communication and other difficulties and mostly have an inherent distrust of “professionals”. Clients are often unreliable, late and considerable time is spent traveling to see them, as they have no means of transport and/or cannot afford to travel. Therefore, taking instructions and advising accordingly is not a quick or simplistic process.
The fact that funding has been on a Not-For-Profit basis has meant that we have been able to travel to clients, take proper instructions and offer a quality legal service. Likewise, the fact that the service is based in a large commercial law firm has meant that LFYP clients also have easy access to other areas of law from within the firm such as housing, welfare benefits, education, crime, family, community care, employment, personal injury and human rights. This is a key factor in this service as young peoples problems are rarely about just one isolated issue.
The “post-care order” area of children’s law is vitally importantto secure better outcomes for children in care. Representation of children and youngpeople in thisarea by members of the legal profession couldsubstantially improve these outcomes if statutory agencies are challenged at an early stage before problems become entrenched. A key aim of LFYP is to encourage child care lawyers across the UK to undertake this work as an “add on” to their existing child care practices. Funding this work is a crucial issue. Through access to early advice, allowing early negotiation and resolution of problems, considerable costs are likely to be savedin the longer term. Manyof the well documented “social problems” children in care and care leaverscurrently develop(which can be hugely demanding on resources)may be avoided. However, law firms will only ever engage in this as an area of law if it is financially viable to do so. Bearingin mind the particular needs of this client group, i.e. their age, vulnerability, complexity of issues etc.any model adopted to encourage representation in this area will have to have the necessary flexibility to ensure that the profession is not discouraged at an early stage from becoming involved.
A few case summaries of matters dealt with so far:-
Case summaries:
1. K, aged 14, had recently moved to a new foster placement after facing many moves since she came in to Local Authority care at 9-years. Initially, K had been placed with her younger brother and was told they would not be separated. However, they were separated and he was subsequently freed for adoption. K was confused about the process and wanted contact with her brother and other family members. LFYP negotiations with the Local Authority resulted in some resolution concerning contact with brother, but also in permanent placement with K’s maternal grandmother who had not, despite requests, been previously assessed as a possible carer.
2. Advice given to A about the level of support, which she felt to be inadequate, that she was receiving from the Local Authority as a Care Leaver. A also had concerns that her former foster carers, who were responsible for abusing her, were openly fostering again. Matters were taken up with the Local Authority.
3. B, aged 14-years, was referred to LFYP by a local advocacy project. B, who was the subject of a Care Order, felt his direct requests to improve his contact arrangements with mother and siblings were being ignored in both his Reviews and by his Social Worker. Negotiations therefore commenced with the Local Authority accordingly and contact issues resolved.
4. T, aged 15-years, was placed by his Local Authority in a local Children’s Home 2 years earlier. His Local Authority planned to move him back to his home town at 16-years. Despite the young person’s initial support for this move, T then refused to move as he did not want to return to the town in which he had been seriously abused by a number of people as a young child. Negotiations resulted in some changes to the mechanics of the plan and T agreed to move. However following this he ran away from his unit and returned to his original children’s home. Further negotiations resulted in T being placed in a different location. Client is now happy and receiving therapeutic help and support.
6. E, a 17-year-old Care Leaver was referred to LFYP by his long-term foster carers. E’s placement was breaking down and E needed advice regarding his move into independent accommodation. E had over many years received very little support from his Local Authority and there had been a catalogue of failures, i.e. his contact with brother had stopped as no one could make the necessary arrangements, he had no idea of his background as Life Story work had not been done, he had rarely seen his Social Worker and was fearful he would leave foster care without the support he should receive under the Leaving Care Provisions. LFYP were therefore engaged to advise E of his entitlement to support on leaving care, to address contact with brother and to liaise with the Local Authority to ensure E’s accommodation and support needs were met. Although the need for permanent accommodation is still ongoing, E is currently residing in safe temporary accommodation and the Local Authority are being more pro-active in their support of him.