Mr.
Timpson: I am grateful to the Minister for that
reassurance, and it is reassurance. He is clearly sympathetic and
accepts the thrust behind our amendments in principle. It is heartening
to see that there is movement with the commitments made under the
review of the national minimum standards, particularly on fees. I will
read with interest what the Minister provides on anonymity, but, again,
I am heartened that he agrees with our position in principle. On that
basis, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the motion.
Motion and
clause, by leave,
withdrawn.
New
Clause
16Medical
records of adopted
children Local authorities
must make provision for the parents of children given for adoption to
deposit medical records which may include samples of their DNA as part
of the childs medical record to be made available to the
medical practitioner responsible for the child..[Tim
Loughton.] Brought
up, and read the First
time.
Tim
Loughton: I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second
time.
The
Chairman: With this it will be convenient to discuss the
following: New clause 21 Duty to keep
records (1) It shall
be the duty of every local authority and voluntary organisation that
looks after or provides accommodation for a child to maintain records
prescribed by regulations. (2)
Regulations may provide for the transfer of records held by a voluntary
organisation to another voluntary organisation or local
authority.. New
clause 22Duty to provide access to
records (1) A
post-care adult has the right, at his request, to receive from the
local authority or voluntary organisation holding his care
records: (a) all the
information relating to his personal
history; (b) all relevant
information relating to his family
history. (2) Subsection (1)
does not apply to a request for information in circumstances where the
local authority or voluntary organisation is authorised by regulations
to withhold the information or any part of
it. (3) Regulations may provide
for local authorities and voluntary organisations to provide
appropriate support, including information and advice, to post-care
adults if requested. (4) The
regulations may provide for circumstances in which the local authority
or voluntary organisation holding the records may arrange for another
local authority or voluntary organisation near the post care
adults home to provide access to the records and
support. (5) In this section
post care adult means a person aged 18 and over who has
at any time been in the care of, or looked after or accommodated by, a
local authority or voluntary
organisation..
Tim
Loughton: I do not wish to delay the Committee for too
long. New clause 16 is a probing amendment. I am in sympathy with new
clauses 21 and 22 in the name of the hon. Member for Mid-Dorset and
North Poole and others. I want to focus on health records. We had a
discussion on that and the problems that occur on the Adoption and
Children Bill. I am involved with a charity called Cardiac Risk in the
Young, which will be holding an annual reception on the Terrace before
long. It deals with the tragedy of young people who drop down dead all
of a sudden due to a congenital heart defect about which they knew
nothing, often relating to problems inherited from parents or defects
that could have been detected or been scanned for and dealt with before
the fatality happened. As we discussed during the Adoption and Children
Bill, there are cases of children who develop a genetic disease later
in life, without any knowledge that they may have inherited it from a
birth parent with whom they no longer have contact and/or knowledge
of.
The purpose
of new clauses 21 and 22, which were proposed by BAAF, is to ensure
that the lifelong needs of post-care adults are not overlooked during
debates on the reform of the care system. It is paramount, when
appropriate, that a child who has been through the care system should
be able to access the medical records of their birth parents, or that
those medical records should be available to the person responsible for
caring for that child, so that when the child becomes an adult he or
she can refer to them to see whether they mention anything that might
prejudice their health later in life.
The idea of a
genetic key has been mentioned. For those children who end up in the
care system and then go for adoption, there should be a formalised
system for keeping their health records and the records of their birth
parents safely, so that they can be made available to the children and
the childrens health advisers when appropriate. Although it is
common sense for that to happen, it does not happen often
enough.
When children
are pushed from one placement to another, and have unsettled lives, the
capacity for medical records to go missing is exacerbated. We know that
a large number of children in the care system have not had the basic
vaccinations, so their health outcomes are already prejudiced. They do
not have access to some of the basic medical preventions that are
available to the rest of the population.
The new
clauses are probing, to see whether such provisions are necessary and,
if it is not already good practice, whether the Government would
consider them as a basis for spreading good guidance, so that a
directive along those lines could be issued to local
authorities.
Annette
Brooke: I shall speak to new clauses 21 and 22. I do not
disagree with anything said by the hon. Member for East Worthing and
Shoreham. The purpose of the clauses are linked. The first is on the
duty to keep records. Whatever should be in those records and how it
should be transferred would, I assume, be dealt with in regulation. The
details and possibly the medical records, too, could be the subject of
regulation. The second is on the duty to provide access to records, on
which I particularly want to speak.
It is
estimated that 350,000 adults in the United Kingdom have spent all or
part of their childhood in foster or residential care. The sharing of
memories and
photographsall the things that we do with
our own familiesare not possible for most post-care adults.
They may in due course want to make contact with parents and siblings,
but that might not be possible. Each year, an estimated 4,000 requests
are made by post-care adults for access to files. They do so for many
reasonsto rebuild part of their lives, to build self-esteem or
because they need to know about their past identity and
relationships.
Requests by
post-care adults for access to childhood information held in records
retained by the local authority come under the Data Protection Act
1998. That Act, however, is not an effective way of meeting the
information needs of post-care adults. It imposes restrictions on birth
party information, and it does not take account of the plight of
post-care adults who want to obtain their family history and details of
their parents and siblings.
For many
years, rightly so, legislation has been in place to assist adopted
people to access support. Today, I am looking for equality of
treatment. The same opportunities do not extend to post-care adults,
and it could be argued that until they do so those adults will continue
to receive a second-rate service, compared with adopted
people.
Mr.
Kidney: I wanted to intervene to say that I support the
new clause, which is why my name appears against it. I do not wish to
make a speech. Is not the crux of the matter that there is a
legislative framework for adopted children as adults to access their
records and learn more about their history, but there is no such
framework for adults who were children in care? Those adults have to
fall back on the Data Protection Act, which was not meant for that
purpose and actually gets in the
way.
Annette
Brooke: I thank the hon. Gentleman for his intervention.
He knows that I am using the BAAF briefing, so he probably anticipated
where I was heading. There is an action on access group which is
calling for a legislative framework that would enable post-care adults
to access information so that they could have a coherent and personal
account of their origins and time in care. It also calls for the
availability of advice and support that post-care adults can request if
they wish, including intermediary services to help to locate and
contact family members, and for an audit of statutory and voluntary
sector records to be undertaken and published, to enable post-care
adults to know where records can be found. Clearly, a lot more needs to
be done for that group of
people. I
would like to pay tribute to my noble Friend Baroness Barker who has
raised the issue on a number of occasions in the other place, most
recently during the passage of this Bill. Lord Adonis said that the
House of Lords
was indebted
to the noble Baroness, Lady Barker, for raising the critical issue of
how best to ensure proper access to information and related services,
not only by those who have been adopted but by those who have been in
care.[Official Report, House of Lords, 14 June
2005; Vol. 672, c.
1189.] Therefore
the consideration today is: It is a critical issue, but can it
be addressed
please? I
constantly come across explanations of how there is already an
appropriate strategy framework in place to enable post-care adults to
access their case records, and that there are already arrangements for
the placement of children, and general regulations and data protection
legislation. However, I am told by those with practical
experience that the provisions are not working. They do not address the
particular circumstances of post-care adults, and are simply
inadequate. I will not go on at length about that inadequacyI
want the Minister to go further than what already exists to address the
point that the provisions are inadequate, and to tell us what can be
done to improve the situation. The important point is that we need the
legislative framework for adults who were looked-after children. It is
really important to progress
that.
Kevin
Brennan: I will do my very best to satisfy as many people
as I can before the bell
tolls. On
new clause 16, we agree that where a child is adopted it is important
for their GP to have full and accurate medical information in order to
meet that childs health needs. It is equally important that
local authorities have full and accurate medical information about a
child where adoption is the plan, and that the childs adoptive
parents are also given that information. That provision already exists
in regulations, and I will not go through the regulations now because I
seek to keep the Committee happy. However, I shall write to everybody
and set outperhaps in fullwhat those regulations are
and why I think that they are satisfactory. There is nothing to prevent
birth parents from approaching the local authority and asking it to
pass on new medical information to the childs adoptive parents
and GP. There should be a balance between the interests of the child,
and the privacy of birth parents and the confidentiality of medical
records. That is a difficult balance to strike. However, local
authorities are required to record detailed information about a
childs health and medical history, and must arrange for regular
assessments of the childs health and take health matters into
account in regular reviews of the childs
case. 2.30
pm New
clauses 21 and 22 relate to looked-after children. Looked-after
children are not covered by the support and assistance under the
Adoption and Children Act 2002. The hon. Lady mentioned intermediary
services which was my own addition to that Act. I accept that formerly
looked-after children do not have access to the same services, but
there are important distinctions between the two groups. Looked-after
children did not change their name or identity. The overwhelming
majority returned to their families during the course of their
childhoods. That is a vital distinction.
Most children
do not typically spend a significant period of time being looked after
before a permanent arrangement for their care is made either with a
parent, another family member or an adoptive parent. These two new
clauses are not necessary because the appropriate statutory framework
exists. I shall not set out again what that is. The hon. Lady is
familiar with it and I will again write to members of the Committee
with the full details of the regulations that I am talking
about.
There will be
individual adults who are trying to piece together information about
their time in the care system from a long time ago. Although the Data
Protection Act provides for access to personal information, if records
are incomplete then, sadly, no new legislative provision would be able
to conjure up non-existent
records. Record-keeping is now much more consistent.
The guidance is clearer than it has been in previous decades. The
Children Act 1989 sets a better framework than previously existed. The
integrated childrens system and the detailed resources being
produced to support it aim to improve record keeping still
further.
While I do
not agree with the hon. Lady that we need primary legislation, we
recognise that practice varies. Existing guidance already highlights
the need for local authorities to handle these issues sensitively and
provide appropriate support. In the planned revision of the statutory
guidance to the Children Act there is an opportunity to update the
existing guidance to local authorities and to ensure that the current
best practice is promoted more widely. I will seek to do
that.
Mr.
Kidney: The briefing from BAAF, to which the hon. Member
for Mid-Dorset and North Poole referred, anticipates that the Minister
will say that the guidance is adequate, so there is no need for primary
legislation. Does he not understand that BAAF, Barnardos, the
Care Leavers Association, the Catholic Childrens Society, the
Childrens Society, the National Childrens Bureau, the
National Leaving Care Advisory Service, the NCH, the Post Care Forum,
Voice and the Who Cares? Trust all say that the present legislative
framework is out of date and inadequate? It has been overtaken by the
Data Protection Act 1998 and that gets in the way of people having
access to records that are relevant to their own
identity.
Kevin
Brennan: I realise that I am outnumbered. I take the hon.
Gentlemans point very seriously and I will look carefully at
what they have to say. But I also give an undertaking that during the
planned revision of the Children Act statutory guidance we will look at
updating the existing guidance for local authorities and we will try to
ensure that current best practice is promoted. On that basis, I hope
that hon. Members will not press these new
clauses.
Tim
Loughton: I am grateful for that response. We have had an
interesting debate. I am particularly pleased that the Minister has
undertaken to write to us with further details. I moved my last new
clause and I am equally delighted to withdraw it. I beg to ask leave to
withdraw the
motion. Motion
and clause, by leave,
withdrawn.
New
Clause
20Duty
to consider childrens views in service
improvement After section 22
of the 1989 Act
insert 22H
Childrens views in service
improvement (1) Each local
authority shall establish a Children in Care Council or other
collective mechanism to ascertain the views of children they are
looking after about the services these children are
receiving. (2) Regulations
shall prescribe the functions, composition, powers and resources of the
Children in Care Council or other
mechanism. (3) The director of
the childrens services and lead member for childrens
services shall give due consideration to the views expressed by the
members of the Children in Care Council or other collective
mechanism.
(4) The director of childrens services and
lead member for childrens services shall report annually to the
Children in Care Council or other mechanism on the steps they have
taken in response to the views expressed by its
members..[Annette
Brooke.] Brought
up, and read the First
time. Annette
Brooke: I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second
time.
This is about
the participation of looked-after children. I do not want to undermine
the great strides forward that have been made generally in terms of
taking on board children and young peoples views and listening
to them. But it is vital that we make sure that childrens views
are fully taken on board in service improvement. The new clause calls
for each local authority to establish a children in care council or
other collective mechanism to ascertain the views of the children they
are looking after about the services they are
receiving. We
must acknowledge that it is not prescriptive to say that every local
authority shall have a children in care council. There are obviously
other ways of accessing childrens views. It may not be
appropriate for a very small authority to have a children in care
council. However, there should be a collective mechanism to bring
children and young people together to engage in debate on a fairly
regular basis, not just once a year. That would enable them to have a
dialogue with the lead member of the council and the director of
childrens
services. The
purpose of the new clause is to place a duty on local authorities to
provide a collective mechanism for children in their care. It would
obviously be helpful for the director of childrens services and
the lead member for childrens services to be able to give due
consideration to the views of such groups, to report on their responses
and to give action to the views
expressed. I
was honoured and privileged, along with the hon. Member for Crewe and
Nantwich, to attend the all-party parliamentary group on adoption and
fostering yesterday. I met a virtual head teacher for the first time. I
was looking forward to that moment and it was impressive to hear him
talk about his work in the local authority where he is effectively head
teacher for 500 looked-after children. In any school situation, it
would be good to have a school council among a group of 500 children.
With all of the good work going on with the virtual head teacher, it
would be superb to have a children in care council. I can see that it
would really work with those sorts of
numbers. Following
that meeting, I am even more inspired about this idea. I am very keen
on school councils and like to promote them when I go round schools.
Now that we have virtual head teachers, I do not see why a virtual head
teacher should not be empowered, or have a duty, to set up a
council. Lord
Adonis claimed in the House of Lords that it was unnecessary to
legislate for children in care councils because we have existing
regulations for children in care to be consulted about service
provision. My briefing points out that what is in existence is only an
annual one-off event for the children and young peoples panel.
A children in care council would be ongoing with continuous
participation and existing ideas could be built upon. Consultations are
narrowed by specific questions, where as a children in care council
would
be pretty open-ended. The views of children in care would be
heard directly by the people who are vital to the provision of
services: the director and the lead
member. Most
of all, this proposal focuses on the specific views and experiences of
children in care. Throughout the Bill we have made the point that we
must keep focusing on the particular needs of children in care. I
emphasise that I am not suggesting that the new clause should result in
a children in care council for every local authority. I can see that
there would be variations. However, I think that it would be excellent
to have a commitment in the Bill to listening to the views of
looked-after
children. The
new clause is compatible with article 12 of the convention on the
rights of the child. It would bring out debates on local needs and it
could spread accountability to children in care. How often do we hear
young people say, Well I said such and such, but it did not
make any difference.? Regular interactive meetings with young
people would enable them to follow something through. They would be
able to find out why good ideas that they had raised had not been
implemented. They would be able to find out the reasons and chase
people up to get on with the job. I commend the new clause to the
Committee for serious
consideration.
|