Mind welcomes court victory in defending the human rights of children in care
Mind, the mental health charity, has intervened jointly with children’s rights charity Article 39 in a legal appeal of a judgment that could see some children in care confined by local authorities without any independent oversight.
On 5 February 2025, the Court of Appeal confirmed that the appeal had been successful and that they would provide their full reasons at a later date.
The case (J: Local Authority consent to Deprivation of Liberty, Re [2024] EWHC 1690 (Fam)) is an appeal of a judgment about a 14-year-old disabled boy known as “J”. J’s local authority had a care order*, giving it parental responsibility for him and placed him in a children’s home in circumstances amounting to a deprivation of liberty –when you're not free to go anywhere without permission or close supervision.
In the original judgment, the Judge stated the local authority did not require court approval to deprive J of his liberty, which was necessary as he has complex needs and needs a placement with a lot of support. The judge claimed that J’s right to liberty, protected through article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), would not be breached “because all agree it is in his best interests to remain at the children’s home” with extensive restrictions. Before this judgment, local authorities needed to apply to court to authorise care arrangements which amounted to a deprivation of liberty.
Mind had serious concerns about the consequences of this judgement and how it could have affected children subject to care orders who need treatment for mental health in hospital.
Care experienced children are more likely to have poor experiences of inpatient care and are more likely to have experienced multiple admissions to hospital. They are also much more likely to value support from an independent person, such as an Independent Mental Health Advocate (IMHA), to help them understand the mental health system and ensure their voice is heard. Under this ruling they may not have access to such safeguards, including a right to challenge their detention to the Mental Health Tribunal.
Alice Livermore, Head of Legal of Mind, said:
“Mind is delighted with the outcome of this appeal and pleased that the Court of Appeal has recognised the importance of these crucial safeguards for children subject to care orders.
Hospital should be a safe place where people can get treatment and support for mental health problems. But for children the reality is often very different. Mind has heard from children who experienced significant levels of restraint and were traumatised by their experiences. There is also evidence of children inappropriately put in adult wards, far from home, their family, and their support networks.
“The judgment would have meant that children subject to care orders could be admitted as informal patients to mental health wards for long periods of time, based solely on a local authority’s consent.
“Some care experienced children would have been left without a voice or clear route to challenge their confinement. This could have happened even if they were placed far from their usual support network, were subject to very high levels of restraint, or were objecting to their admission.”
*This case and its appeal will only apply to young people with care orders – those who live with a parent or guardian will not be affected.
