D.c.c. V. D.g.
| Jurisdiction | Scotland |
| Judge | Sheriff G.A. Way |
| Court | Sheriff Court |
| Date | 06 February 2012 |
| Docket Number | PO16/10 |
| Published date | 19 March 2012 |
| Sheriffdom of Tayside Central and Fife at DUNDEE Case Number: PO16/10 | |
| Judgment by SHERIFF GEORGE ALEXANDER WAY In the cause DCC Pursuer; against DG Defender: For a Permanence Order with authority to place for adoption the child E ________________ |
Dundee 6 / February / 2012
Act Magson Solicitor Alt. Sharpe Advocate
The Sheriff, having resumed consideration of the cause:
Finds in Fact1 In terms of the Adoption and Children (Scotland) Act 2007 the petitioners are an adoption agency and that this court has jurisdiction.
2 The child E is female and was born on 19th November 2003. She is of white Scottish ethnicity. She does not have a specific religious persuasion and her mother, the Respondent, has not expressed a wish that she be brought up in any faith. The child attends a non denominational school. The child has never been married nor had a civil partner.
3 The child's mother is the Respondent. She is 34 years of age. The Respondent has never been married. The Respondent is of white Scottish ethnicity. The Respondent has Parental Rights and Responsibilities in relation to the child. The Respondent has an older daughter L, under the age of 16, who resides with her father (who is not the father of the child in this matter) in Dundee. The Respondent has no contact with this daughter.
4 The Respondent reported that she experimented with drugs from the age of 16 years and began using heroin in 2007.
5 The Respondent has had considerable support from several agencies to help her address her substance misuse.
6 The Respondent describes her childhood as happy and thinks she was spoiled by her mother and grandparents. Her father never married her mother and he was not part of the household. She did not meet her father until she was approximately 15 years old and has no ongoing contact with him.
7 Her mother began a relationship with another man when the Respondent was around 9 years of age. Her half brother, BCG was born from this relationship. During this time the Respondent was living between the homes of her mother and her grandparents.
8 She disengaged with school, leaving when she was 15 years old with no qualifications.
9 Her mother and grandmother died in 1995 within a few months of each other and the Respondent reports she suffered from depression. She was also pregnant with her first child L and reports that it was from this time that her drug use escalated and became chaotic.
10 The relationship with the child's father ended in 1996 and he successfully applied for custody of LJM in April 1996.
11 The Respondent began a relationship with CB, the child's biological father, in 2001 which lasted until around April 2004. The child is the only child of this relationship. The Respondent's childhood was disrupted by her mother's ill health and drug abuse. She was mainly brought up by her maternal grandparents, but lived between them and her mother and partner.
12 CB is the biological father of the child. CB has never been married. CB has no Parental Rights and Responsibilities in relation to the child. CB has an older child, CD, born 28 July 1995. CD's mother died in 2008 and she lives with her half sister.
13 CB was and is at liberty on licence having been released from prison on 30 September 1993 for an offence of murder. He has numerous other convictions for violence. He is subject to a life-long restriction prohibiting any contact with the child.
14 The child was accommodated on a voluntary basis on 10 April 2004 subject to Section 25 of the Children (Scotland) Act 1995 following a serious incident of domestic violence on the Respondent by her then partner, CB, the child's father,
15 The child was present during the attack on the Respondent and was found to be covered in the Respondent's blood.
16 The Respondent was hospitalised and CB charged with attempted murder.
17 CB was acquitted of attempted murder when the Respondent alleged that on the night in question, she had attacked him with knife and they had then fought with each other in a quarrel over a quantity of heroin.
18 CB was, however, recalled to prison, in terms of his licence and spent a further six years in gaol.
19 CB was transferred to HM Prison Castle Huntly, as part of a rehabilitation programme leading to return to the community. The Respondent visited CB in prison. The respondent, at that time, continued to believe that CB could be a father figure for the child, and sought to resume some sort of relationship with upon his release.
20 CB absconded from Castle Huntly during a home leave visit. The Respondent allowed him to come into her home. The police called at the respondents' house but she denied any knowledge of CB. A search revealed CB hiding in the house. He was arrested and returned to prison.
21 The Respondent now acknowledges that CB should never be allowed into the life of the child.
22 On 3 March 2005 a Children's Hearing issued a Place of Safety Warrant in relation to the Respondent's lifestyle. The child was thereafter placed back into the Respondent's care in terms of section 70 of the Children (Scotland) Act 1995.
23 Between May 2005 and October 2007 the child remained subject to a section 70 Supervision Requirement.
24 On 30 August 2007 the Respondent was admitted to hospital and as there were no family members able to care for the child she was accommodated on a voluntary basis subject to section 25 of the Children (Scotland) Act 1995 until 6 September 2007 when she returned to the Respondent's care.
25 On 18 October 2007 a Children's Hearing discharged the child's Supervision Requirement in favour of voluntary measures.
26 Support to the child and the Respondent was provided by Lochee Family Support Centre staff.
27 On 16th January 2008 Karen Bramhall of Dundee Drug Problem Centre informed Social Work Department staff that the Respondent's methadone prescription had been withdrawn.
28 On 28 January 2008 a six week full-time placement for the child at Menzieshill Nursery was secured to support the Respondent's withdrawal from her medication.
29 On 4 March 2008, the Respondent had been informed of dates for CB's home leave with the condition of him not to come to Menzieshill, the Respondent's home area or to approach her or the child.
30 In June 2008 the Respondent was charged and convicted for leaving the child aged four, unattended at home until 1.05am.
31 In September 2008, when the child was still under the age of five, the Respondent reported her missing to the police. It appears that she had gone out to play in the street and at 8pm she could not be found. The child was later found in the home of a neighbour.
32 On 21 April 2009 at about 23.30 hours a neighbour of the Respondent informed the police that on entering the common close he heard the child crying and calling for the Respondent. On establishing that the child was alone and locked in the house, the neighbour contacted the police. The Respondent was contacted by police by mobile phone and she returned home at 00.20 hours on 22 April 2009.
33 The Respondent was cautioned and questioned by police when she admitted to leaving the child at home while she went to purchase cigarettes.
34 The Respondent was convicted of a Schedule 1 Offence for leaving the child unattended on 21 April 2009. Disposal was a deferred sentence.
35 The Respondent admitted to a lone policeman that she abused heroin, usually two £20.00 bags per day, and that the real reason she left the child alone was to source heroin.
36 On 22 April 2009 the child was removed from the Respondent's care on a Child Protection Order and placed with a foster carer where she continues to reside subject to a supervision requirement under section 70 of the Children (Scotland) Act 1995.
37 Grounds of Referral (5/2/7 of process) in respect of the child were established at Dundee Sheriff Court on 15th May 2009. The child was made subject to a supervision requirement in terms of Section 70(3)(a) and (b) of the Act with residence conditions attached. There is also a condition in the supervision requirement that the child has contact with the Respondent. The principal grounds established were as follows :
3.1 [respondent] has a lengthy history of misuse of drugs. She has been using heroin on a regular basis, spending a considerable amount of money to fund her drug use.
3.2 [respondent] has failed to adhere to a programme to address her drug misuse.
3.3 [respondent] has a record of offending, mainly for theft
3.4 [respondent] has contemplated resumption of her relationship with [the child's] father who seriously assaulted [the respondent] with a knife
4.1 On 28/06/08 at about 1am [the child] was found wandering and crying in the tenement close. She had left the family home to search for her mother who had left her alone and unsupervised for some time.
4.3 On 21-22 /04/2009 [the respondent] left [the child] alone and unsupervised in the family home. [the child] was distressed and her crying was heard by neighbours around 11.50PM. The Police were called and they contacted [the respondent] by telephone and instructed her to return home. An iron presented as potential hazard in the home.
38 A Looked After and Accommodated Child review was held on 30 April 2009 where it was noted that a 12 week Rehabilitation Assessment/Agreement had been put in place.
39 The Respondent agreed to the arrangements contained within the Rehabilitation Plan which included her full co-operation with the Social Work Department and Substance Misuse Service; providing clean samples for testing to support her in managing her drug use; attend appointments with professionals; meet with staff on a planned basis to assess progress; work with Family Centre Staff who would supervise contact; attend all contacts with the child; maintain effective communication with the Social Work Department about any concerns regarding the child and any change of plans.
40 The Respondent failed to attend 50% of twice- weekly contact sessions...
To continue reading
Request your trial