SGO - reversal? Anyone know of this happening?

[pollypocket]

Having secured SGO prior to xmas and rcvd a guide from the court of 6 months no contact we now are getting the fall out of mother presuming that once she is 'back on track' she will simply get little one back. It appears as if all involved presume we are looking after him until she sorts herself out. This is also further supported by maternal grandmother who is in close contact with her daughter (after years of on/off estrangement due to her behaviour). Our role is undermined with statements such as 'she is his mother' - all seem to forget the 3 yrs of emotional abuse and neglect that was so significant he would have been put up for adoption. The getting back on track is great but we were led to believe that even under the best circs it would take 3-5 yrs to solve deep rooted emotional and mental health issues. Everyone is impressed by how she is coping - yet it is obvious why....she doesnt have a 3 yr old to contend with and any possible return would shake his entire foundation. The SGO team stated that he would not cope with another move.

I would just like to know how others have experienced the SGO moving forward, we saw it as pretty much adoption within family and while I am aware of the law in that it can be reversed after a 'significant change in circs' I have huge concerns about our security after the 6 months settling period. How likely is it that we are told he is to return to Mum?

Thanking you all in advance,

pp

[maricharle]

Hi Pollypocket, Like you I got SGO last year although the judge stated I would get it in Feb it wasn't actually awarded until Dec due to some difficult outstanding issues. In Feb however he said "This is my final decision which I will not be altering unless there are significant changes." I took this to mean changes in my circumstances not anyone else's. The mother may wish to have the child back but I cannot see how this can be done because her lifestyle alters for the better. Sgo's are granted to provide stable loving and caring environments for children. To reverse them because the mothers circumstances change would be to discount the positive changes in the childs life thereby discounting the childs rights as per the human rights act.

Sorry I can't answer the question from a legal perspective this is my personal view and interpretation of what I heard the judge say. Hope it helps somehow. Best wishes.

[sonny1966]

We have an SGO in respect of our niece, and I had exactly the same concerns as you about it being reversed because of a change in Mum's circumstances (in fact, my only previous post was asking almost the identical question!). It is horrible living with the uncertainty, particularly when the parent in question is making threats of legal action.
It sometimes feels as if the whole legal system is on the side of the biological parents - even though we (as carers) have done nothing wrong and are only placed in this position by their inabillity to look after their own children.
Over time, the way I've come to look at it is that the SGO was only introduced to give stability to the child and it is THEIR interests that are supposed to take precedence. I therefore hope that it is unlikely that a child who is well adjusted and settled under an SGO would be sent back to the parents who had mistreated them just to give those parents a second (or third or fourth!!) chance.
We have now had our SGO for over 2 years and I do feel more secure about it than I did in the early days.
I also cling on to the fact that, when our case was initially being assessed by SS, B-i-l and his wife were told that the necessary rehab/counselling would take them over 12 months to complete and that successful completion wouldn't guarantee them regaining custody if the little one was settled and had formed attachments to us. So surely, the longer time that passes, the less chance they have of successfully contesting the order.

Mumof5

[Kate]

Hi pollypocket. It sounds as if all this is in the heads of the mother and maternal grandmother. Nothing has objectively changed. You have the SGO: yes the mother has improved for the moment, which is good, but it doesn't alter the situation. You still have several months of no contact and a lot can and may well change in her life during that period. She may well be unable to sustain any change especially once she absorbs that she DOES have to wait to see her son again. Of course it would be best for him, as well as for her own sake, if she does sustain it, but it still won't alter the fact that you have the SGO and she cant's see him at all at present.

Do she and her mother actually think the no contact for 6 months guide will be changed if she stays "back on track"? It's obvious from what you say that this period of no contact is to benefit the little boy so that he can experience a long (for a small child) period of stability and also develop a more secure attachment with you.

Now is the time for you to stick to your guns. Don't be influenced by what may well be a few better weeks in her life, and which certainly can't provide any pointer as to how she wil be over a much longer period.

I don't have experience of SGOs so hope someone will be able to give some more factual input if you need it. If not, could call the advice line with any concerns.

Hang in there and try to hold on to the facts, not the fantasies of the mum and mat. grandma.

[Robin D]

I'm not aware of any cases, but the courts have decided that the 'leave' conditions for SGO's is the same as that for placement orders (for adoption). The relevant conditions are effectively set down in Warwickshire County Council v M [2007] EWCA Civ 1084 where a mother had applied for leave to overturn a placement order as her circumstances had changed. The lower court allowed leave, but the LA and guardian appealed that decision. It's a lengthy judgement but most of the stuff of relevance is probably found in para's 5, 6 and 24. In effect this appears to say that the welfare of the child remains paramount. Paragraph 31 is particularly helpful I think in providing teh reassurance you need.

David, please chip in if there have been more recent developments.

Best wishes ....... Robin

Grandparent carer in Suffolk [:)]

[pollypocket]

Thank you for all of this - would a court observe us having a baby as a significant change in circs that would be detrimental to our little one? It was something I raised during the application process and it was responded to positively my SS who felt although there would be the obvious questions little one would benefit from being within a firm and stable family.

It is indeed the maternal grandmother who I also know to actively encourage Mum to believe she could and should get little one back - my suspicions are that Mum knows she cannot cope and is unlikely to be able to change enough (coming off benefits and getting a part time job doesnt begin to touch the surface). The family problems are deep rooted and as far as I can see no attempt is being made to solve/resolve these recurring issues.



pp

[maricharle]

Hi Pollypocket, It would be a significant change for you and your little family and a joyous one at that. Your having a baby would certainly not be a matter for the courts. All the very best Wishing you well.

[youngagain]

All decisions in court are made with the childs welfare foremost in mind. I can see circumstances where an SGO could be challenged where say a child of an age able to make an informed choice chooses to live with a rehabilitated parent. I doubt that in practice that this would happen as uprooting any child at any age is traumatic in the extreme.

The courts are aware that an SGO provides permanence within the family, it is difficult to see how any argument could support the removal of a child from one.

[fatcat]

hi

my understanding is that the court views a placement under SGO as a permanent placement and that it would take a hell of a lot for the court to justify removing the child.

under the 'no order' principle, the court must only make an order if doing so would improve the child's situation. if an order would leave things the same, or make things worse, then the court cannot make an order. in other words, the court would need to be confident that the child would definitely be better off with the mother. given the legth of time it would take her to make the necessary changes i doubt that any court would consider her application.
it is possible that mther has confused SGO with a Care Ordr, under which she would only need to demonstrate that she can offer parenting ghood enough to meet the child's needs. SGO is a completely different ball game and the threshold of competence she would have to meet would be far higher. i don't think you would have anyhting to worry about.