Special Guardianship Orders Children Care Planning - Case Study Example

 Introduction Many individuals today marvel at different physical characteristics they posses. But, for a second have you ever paused and wondered why it is that you are tall or have blue eyes? The answer to this always lies in the appearance of the parents because when you closely examine your various characteristics like eye color, you discover that you share similar traits with your parents. However, this is not the case for individuals who are adopted since they have always failed in finding similarities tying them to their current parents. This leaves them in a state of wonder as they can not tell their past and at the same time determine their future. Special guardianship orders (SGO) can be described as a process through which one or more persons are chosen by the law to be a child’s special guardian. The order was enacted in 1989 and its main purpose was to cater for children whose parents were deemed irresponsible to take full charge of parenting thus were considered to be better off when given to others to carry out the task. Today, children whose parents are not in a situation to cater for their basic needs are catered for under the Children Act of 1989. Adoption on the hand refers to the process of adopting a child and taking it as yours. In this paper and as eminent in the case study of care planning ‘Caitlin and Ben’, I will discuss SGO over adoption. This is because contrary to adoption, children under Special Guardianship Order always enjoy the happiness and joy of remaining in touch with their biological families. In addition, SGO is extremely essential for children because one reason or the other may not be suitable candidates for adoption. An example is that from the case study, Caitlin (aged 7) and Ben (4) are children whose parents are still alive but facing different issues therefore, it would not be appropriate to adopt them as they and the parents share a bond and may still need or miss each other in the future (Fahlberg, 2012). Law and Policy and Ability to Contest for the Threshold Criteria on SGO Under the SGO, an individual applying to be as a special guardian is given the parental responsibility of a parent. This may include parenting, educating among other roles played by other normal parents. Those who are deemed fit to apply are further addressed in Children Act 1989, section 14A(8), (9). However, in most cases, the order always last until the child or children in question attains the age of eighteen years (Koocher & Keith-Spiegel, 1993). There exist instances where the order is changed or cancelled and the reasons are highlighted as follows. In most cases, it is always the court which decides on whether to grant an individual who has applied as a special guardian the right to exercise the role after receiving a petition (Selwyn, Farmer, & Turney, 2011).The law has placed certain threshold criteria for SGO and candidates making application as they are expected to posses the following requirements. Individuals who are or have been guardian of the child in question like for example Michelle and Sue is considered eligible candidates. Secondly, individuals possessing residence order which is an order from the court settling the arrangements of the person whom the child should live with are also allowed to apply to become special guardians (Nussbaum, 2006). Thirdly, Local authority fosters parents who have been living with a child for a time period of not less than twelve months are also considered. Fourthly, under the children act of 1989, certain mentioned people are also considered to be special guardian of a child. Lastly, of all candidates applying to become special guardians, none should be the biological parents of the child in question and they should all have attained the age of eighteen years (Fahlberg, 2012). Due to cases of disputes arising on the issue of special guardianship orders, the court deemed it fit to consider the circumstances under which an order could be contested under the Children Act of 1989.Before contesting special guardianship orders; one must have valid reasons to do so. Circumstances and situations in which the orders can be contested includes situations like when the special guardian themselves applies to the court with an intention of changing the order. This may be caused by a number or reason like for example emotional or psychological state of the special guardian who feels that he or she is ready to take over the parental responsibilities of their child. An example is that from the case study, Jill and Martin who are drug users may contest on the orders placed by the court if they can prove that they have corrected their different drug problems. The child can also contest the orders on special guardianship citing different reasons like when the special guardians are abusive or cruel to them and the last situation is when local authorities who have care orders can contest on the SGO citing various reasons like abuse of the child in court (O'halloran, 2006). Assessing Parents Who Substance Misuse Many cases in the past have been reported of neglect of a child because of substance abuse by the parents. To protect children from neglect, various policies like the Child Abuse Prevention Act of 1974 were introduced. For social workers to understand cause or behaviour resulting to allegations from general to severe cases of neglect of children, physical or sexual abuse, it is imperative for them to assess parents for substance misuse. It is always very difficult to determine parents who misuse drugs because of the numerous effects of various drugs experienced by different patients. This makes it extremely necessary for social workers to collect and gather lots of information from different sources in order to make an accurate assessment on whether patients are abusing drugs or not (Cleaver, 2007). There are different ways of assessing parents considered to be abusing drugs. The first method may be to determine the level of children endangerment and this may include checking at the kinds, frequency and amount of substance used by parents in questions or the their willingness to address the substance abuse situation. Moreover, to successfully achieve this, a number of various assessment tools can be used to asses parents from various perspectives. Such tools like the Wesley mission’s health child safety assessment in drug using environment can be used to determine the capability of parents who abuse drugs to provide for a nurturing home environment for their children. In most cases those who always use these tools are drug and alcohol social workers (Kroll & Taylor, 2003). Secondly, direct observation of family members can also be used as a tool for assessing parents who abuse drugs through such ways as examining the physical appearance, slurred speech and alcohol breath of the parents involved. Individuals abusing drugs are always easily identified by deterioration of their health. Thirdly, interviews are also important tools to use for social workers to assess parents who misuse drugs. This may be conducted on the suspected family members and the best way to determine those who are using burnt substances or abusing drugs is by critically analyzing their response. Parents abusing drugs always characterized through their manipulation tendencies and denial. Using interviews, an assessor may look at things like the ability of the parents to pay and meet basic bills and those who have access to their child or home. This is normally effective because those abusing drugs are not always able to meet their basic bills as they use money on drugs. Lastly, the availability of the parent may be checked in assessing for such kinds of parents like for example when referrals are always made on the parent by law officers or calls received from relatives reporting that the parents have gone missing for given duration of time (Hart & Powell, 2006). Legal Decision in Special Guardianship Orders In making any legal decisions pertaining to SGO, legal decisions are always based on the Adoption and children Act of 2002 section 29(5 and 6). The Act states that it is solely the court which decides on cases pertaining to special guardianship orders of any child filled by stipulating qualifications for individuals who apply. In addition, before making any decisions regarding SGO local authorities are expected to carry out investigations and make reports on persons making application to serve as special guardians for children whose parents misuse drugs (Fahlberg, 2012). There are instances where legal decisions made by the court pertaining to special orders are challenged by parents as they may not be comfortable with the decisions of the court regarding who should care for their child. This at times always leads to contest of the order or disturbance to the special guardian given to care for the child. In such cases, it is always the court again to intervene by placing restricting orders to the birth parents (Jordan & Lindley, 2006). Social workers and the court always determine the type of persons making applications in order to avoid granting the order to persons who are not capable of caring for the child. This is always achieved through collaboration and sharing of information between such parties like local law enforcers, parents themselves, relatives and the court (Grande-Bretagne., 2006). The end result is that the child always gets to live with capable persons who care and protect them from harm. However, instances of split in professional powers which undermines special guardianship orders have been recorded as some birth parents always go against court orders by hiding their children to distant relatives or brainwashing their children to oppose the court’s decision. An example is that in the case of Caitlin and Ben’ in spite of the children being placed under SGO for eleven months, the parents are still adamant as they still searching for ways to reverse the judgement made by the court (Great Britain., 2011). Relevance of Reduction of Legal Aid to Special Guardianship Orders Legal aid can be described as free services related to advice, assistance or representation based on the law for individuals who are not able to acquire or sponsor such services or assistance for themselves. Under children Act of 2002 section 34, local authorities are expected to provide special guardianship orders support services like f to the family taking in a child under.. The reduction in legal aid has been caused by the need for justice ministry to reduce the budget in the cost of civil legal aid scheme (Maurer & Smith, 2013). Likewise, the higher threshold of legal aid which requires special guardians to meet eligibility criteria has also affected and greatly reduced legal aid to some of the parents who fail to meet required criteria thus creating challenges for them in taking care of the child. Reduction of legal aid on special guardianship orders has negatively affected the special guardians. A reduction in the ‘stay in touch’ service has severely affected majority of the special guardians because as the child under their custody grows and develops the needs of the child increases. Therefore, a reduction in legal aid means a reduction in ‘stay in touch services’ because this reduces their chances of reviewing the changes in the needs of the child under the care thus placing a limit resources which are used in taking care of the child. Secondly, reduction in legal aid affects special guardians because for those who are taking care of children with complex needs, a worker is always assigned to them. When they can not be assigned a worker who facilitates such things like contact, advice and mediation, their role in taking care of the needs of the child is complicated as it become difficult for them to meets all the requirements of taking care of the child under them. Thirdly, some of the special guardian who are not always financially stable always request for financial assistance to assist them in meeting the diverse needs of children. When this is reduced, then their role in meeting a child’s need becomes complicated as they may not meet and pay each bill accrued as a result of taking care of the child (Teaster, 2010). Special Guardianship Orders and Its Outcome to Children and Financial Support Special guardianship orders have always impacted children in a positive way because in making the order, the benefit to the child is always the basis to lay emphasis. In cases where a child is staying with parents who misuse drugs, their wishes and feelings are not always placed into considerations therefore they are always not happy most of the time. However, before placing a child under special guardianship orders, their wishes and feelings are always considered by social workers handling their case as stated in the Children Act 1989(Nixon, 2007). The impact of these is that in most cases the child’s physical, emotional or education needs are always met. In addition, the child always benefits because when placed under special guardianship orders, they are free from harm which they would have suffered at the hands of their parents who use drug and are incapable of conducting their parental roles. An example is that in the case study ‘Caitlin and Ben’ Ben who is a young boy is harms himself because of lack of parental modelling from parents who are not always there to guide hi and his sister (Selwyn, Farmer, & Turney, 2011). The main focus on financial assistance towards special guardianship orders is to guarantee the comfort of the child placed under the order. There are cases where financial support is granted to special guardianship orders after an assessment is done for those considered to be eligible for the support and they include cases where special guardians are required to look after a child but cannot accurately do so due to limitations in finances. Secondly, a child’s care will require greater expenditure of resources like for example when the child is suffering from an ailment. Thirdly, in cases where special guardians cannot meet the costs such costs like travel costs for the child’s visit to a relative and lastly, when the local authority feels that the special guardians should be given assistance in accommodating and making changes at his or her house to house the child (Axford, Berry & Little, 2005). Child Development and Special Guardian Orders Special guardianship orders have both positively and negatively impacted child developments from various perspectives. On the issue of health, majority of children living with special guardians rarely falls ill as they are always cared for making them well and thriving. On their educational progress, most children relatively do well but this is always based on their age ability. In addition, their skills interest and hobbies are always displayed as they are allowed to pursue this by their special guardians (Davis, 2014). On self confidence, majority are always confident because of they compare their current and past situation therefore always hopeful on what awaits them in the future. However, on the issue of emotional ties, these children are always poor as they are always missing either both or one of their parents and the end result is that at times they are always stressed and lost in thinking because of missing a parent with whom they are emotionally tied with. Likewise, Special guardianship orders also denies the children with the ability of having close friends as most of them always end having no real friends yet manage to keep close ones. These children also experience emotional and behavioural difficulties at times an example is that in the case when a child misses a birth parent but is currently living with a special guardian, he or she may not be able to express him/her effectively leading to suppressed emotions. However, in the end, special guardianship orders always ensure that theydevelops in different aspects to become responsible members of a society (Cawson Et Al, 2009). Discriminations of Special Guardians Who Are Of Same Sex In today’s society, same sex relationships have become common and increased as it used to be in the past. Cases of lesbians and gays living together as couples is not a strange thing to hear nowadays partially because their rights have been acknowledged and are being protected for in the constitution under the rights. Although, they are still being discriminated against in various areas of the planet, majority of them enjoy freedom as they have a body which advocates for their sexual rights all round the world. Special guardianship orders recognises carers of same sex relationship as it focuses primarily on the ability of a carer to provide care for a child in ways that takes into consideration the child’s welfare. Therefore, same sex couples who wish to become special guardians need to ensure that the needs of the child they wish to place under them are met and that they protected from harm of any manner (Stein, 2001). Same sex special guardians are susceptible to discrimination from the society who feels that the welfare of a child is not always given considered when they become special guardians. In most cases, the basis of societal discrimination is always based on sexual orientation of those wishing to serve as special guardians for children. Today, many agencies still do not believe that same sex couples can act as effective special guardians because they question on the couples ability to guarantee a good upbringing on a child. Due to the fact that these couples are always of the same sex, majority of the society believes in a notion that child development relies on inputs from both the male and female figures in a family. Therefore, when same sex couples act as special guardians to a child, the child may develop to take after them like for example a child who is taken in special guardians who are of the same sex may grow to feel that normal marriages are not good thus turned to lesbians and gays in the society. Moreover, children are always moulded by the type of parenting style they receive and when same sex partners are the one to act as parental figures, then the child grows to practice same sex relationships in the society(Harris-Short, & Miles, 2011). Conclusion In conclusion, the importance of a permanent home to children cannot be underestimated. It is a right for children to grown and develops under a family that is capable of providing for their basic needs. In most cases, majority of children are always safe under the care of their birth parents, but in cases where that is not possible, then special guardianship orders is always the best alternative for a child. This is because children who cannot be looked after by their birth parents are looked after by adults who have the ability to provide them with a safe and nurturing care as they grow into adults in the society. Therefore, individuals acting as special guardians should be considered as second parents to a child because the role they play in moulding a child into a responsible adult in the society is not an easy task as many would shy away from playing parental roles for children who are not theirs. Bibliography AXFORD, N., BERRY, V., & LITTLE, M. (2005). Forty Years of Research, Policy and Practice in Children's Services a Festschrift for Roger Bullock. Chichester, John Wiley & Sons. http://www.123library.org/book_details/?id=20216. BEECHAM, J., & SINCLAIR, I. (2007). Costs and outcomes in children's social care messages from research. London, Jessica Kingsley Publishers. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&scope=site&db=nlebk&db=nlabk&A N=180466. CAWSON, P., GORIN, S., CLEAVER, H., & WALKER, S. (2009). Safeguarding Children a Shared Responsibility. Chichester, John Wiley & Sons. http://www.123library.org/book_details/?id=22314. CLEAVER, H. (2007). Child protection, domestic violence and parental substance misuse family experiences and effective practice. London, JKP/Jessica Kingsley Publishers. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&scope=site&db=nlebk&db=nlabk&A N=216740. DWYER, J. G. (2011). The relationship rights of children. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. DAVIS, L. (2014). The social worker's guide to children and families law. London, Jessica Kingsley Publishers. http://public.eblib.com/choice/publicfullrecord.aspx?p=1693674. FAHLBERG, V. (2012). A child's journey through placement. London, Jessica Kingsley Publishers. GREAT BRITAIN. (2011). Operation of the family courts: sixth report of session 2010-12. London, The Stationery Office. GRANDE-BRETAGNE. (2006). Care matters: transforming the lives of children and young people in care. Norwich, The Stationery Office. HART, D., & POWELL, J. (2006). Adult drug problems, children's needs assessing the impact of parental drug use : a toolkit for practitioners. London, National Children's Bureau. http://site.ebrary.com/id/10570511. JORDAN, L., & LINDLEY, B. (2006). Special guardianship: what does it offer children who cannot live with their parents? London, Family Rights Group. KOOCHER, G. P., & KEITH-SPIEGEL, P. C. (1993). Children, ethics, and the law: professional issues and cases. Lincoln, University of Nebrasca Press. KROLL, B., & TAYLOR, A. (2003). Parental substance misuse and child welfare. London, Jessica Kingsley Publishers. NUSSBAUM, M. C. (2006). Frontiers of justice disability, nationality, species membership. Cambridge, Mass, Belknap Press. http://site.ebrary.com/id/10318470. O'HALLORAN, K. (2006). The politics of adoption international perspectives on law, policy & practice. Dordrecht, Springer. http://site.ebrary.com/id/10140717. SELWYN, J., FARMER, E., & TURNEY, D. (2011). Improving Child and Family Assessments Turning Research into Practice. London, Jessica Kingsley Publishers. http://www.123library.org/book_details/?id=30858. MAURER, F. A., & SMITH, C. M. (2013). Community/public health nursing practice: health for families and populations. St. Louis, Mo, Elsevier/Saunders. TEASTER, P. B. (2010). Public guardianship: in the best interests of incapacitated people? Santa Barbara, Calif, Praeger. NIXON, P. (2007). Relatively speaking: developments in research and practice in kinship care. Research in Practice. PITCHER, D., CLUVER, L., YOUNG, S., & OPERARIO, D. (2013). Inside Kinship Care Understanding Family Dynamics and Providing Effective Support. London, Jessica Kingsley Publishers. http://public.eblib.com/choice/publicfullrecord.aspx?p=1489942. HARRIS-SHORT, S., & MILES, J. (2011). Family law: text, cases, and materials. Oxford, Oxford University Press. LOWE, N. (2014). Bromley's family law. [S.l.], Oxford University Press. WELSTEAD, M., & EDWARDS, S. S. M. (2013). Family law. STEIN, E. (2001). The mismeasure of desire: the science, theory, and ethics of sexual orientation. Oxford [u.a.], Oxford Univ. Press. Read More