On 23rd
January, shortly after the adjournment debate in the House of Commons
introduced by Craig Whittaker MP, ECLCM received a reply from Mr Timpson to
their letter in December seeking to meet with him.
Mr Timpson
raised a number of interesting reasons why he considered that young people
leaving residential care could not receive equal aftercare support until they
are 21, as the government proposes to do for young people leaving foster care. We have addressed most of these already, but
given Mr Timpson’s letter, it is probably appropriate to do it again.
Mr Timpson
states:
“I completely agree with you,
therefore, that young people should not feel pressured to leave care
prematurely. They need to be consulted and involved in making plans for their
futures and should only be expected to move on from their final care placement
once they are ready to take this significant step.”
You need to
know Minister that this is not happening in a great many cases across the
country. Young people being moved from
settled care placements to supported lodgings and other placements when they
reach 16+ is common. Even councils who have signed the Care Leavers’ Charter to
consult and involve young people are still moving young people before they feel
ready. The Care Leavers’ Charter will not work unless it is made statutory.
The Minister
adds:
“Research has found that many young
people are dissatisfied with the support they receive and, in particular, that
there are shortfalls in planning and preparation for leaving care, which leaves
their needs unmet.”
As care
leavers and people who work with young people in care and care leavers, we
would agree with you about this. Too many young people are being compelled to
leave care and face the world with little support when they are 16 years old
when they are not emotionally or practically able to cope. There is no doubt
whatsoever that preparation for leaving care, be that residential care or
foster care, needs to be improved and we will support any initiative to do
this. We feel that this area for development supports our argument for ongoing
support to 21, including remaining in placement where appropriate, for all
young people leaving care.
We would go
further than Mr Timpson. As we have reported before, national disadvantage
statistics related to NEET, homelessness, mental health, custody, etc. show care leavers are disproportionately
represented. This is not because care leavers are necessarily predisposed to
failure. They are not. It is because
they are not supported at a critical time in their life when they were facing
crisis.
The Minister
has suggested that he will introduce changes “in a heartbeat” when children’s homes are good enough for children
to live in. He suggests too many homes are simply not fit for young people to
continue to live in without significant changes.
If that were
true we would be standing alongside him demanding radical action. However,
although there is work to be done, his own watchdog Ofsted in their recent
report indicated that 68% of children’s homes were judged to be good or better,
and only 8% were judged to be inadequate. This compares very well with the inspection findings of foster care.
Ofsted
results suggest there is little problem based solely on the quality of the
homes to prevent young people who wish and who would benefit from remaining
whilst they gained the emotional and practical skills to become independent,
and as the homes improved their own skills in supporting young people into
independence.
Mr Timpson
identified a practical issue in his letter to ECLCM:
“There would also be practical and
legal issues to be worked through if, in the future, there was a duty on
councils to fund 'staying put' arrangements for care leavers in homes
registered by Ofsted on the basis that they are 'wholly or mainly for
children'.”
The ECLCM
team acknowledge there are statutory issues that would need to be addressed
although we contend that the number of occasions the situation described by the
Minister would be few. However, the Minister also pointed out that the problems
would not be ‘insurmountable”. We
agree and would be happy to support Ofsted to identify and address the issues
if we can. We don’t see them as a major obstacle that need cause undue delay in
introducing equality.
Mr Timpson
added:
“I am aware of the evidence you
mention that young people living in children's homes are more likely to make an
early transition from care compared to those living in foster care. Many of
these young people feel dissatisfied with the support they receive and report
being poorly prepared to make their transition to adulthood. My department is,
therefore, funding the organisation Catch22 to carry out the two year 'Getting
Ready' project in the North West region. This project will identify how to get
children's homes to offer high standards of planning and preparation for
adulthood and will test out ways of enhancing care leavers' education, training
and employment prospects.”
ECLCM have
consistently argued that there is much to be done to prepare young people to
cope when they leave care. Some of us have had to do it – our experience is
first hand. The Minister proposes to have a pilot scheme which is not set up
yet but which will run for two years before reviewing and reporting its
findings.
It could be
many years before the findings of any scheme were acted upon by government –
and there is no firm commitment to act on them at all.
ECLCM identify
a pressing need for government to take urgent steps now to support young
care leavers (from foster care and residential care) who are struggling and
facing destitution, poverty and worse as we speak. It can’t wait for years. This
needs to happen alongside introducing equal aftercare support for all care
leavers to 21. Recent research by the Centre for Social Justice reinforces our
concern that urgent action is needed now to support young people leaving care.
Some
commentators suggest that Ministers are doing all they can and there is very
limited scope to improve the leaving care support arrangements further. They
point out that £40 million is already being invested in improved after care
support for fostered children.
ECLCM do not
accept that. How much is allocated and how it is used is a political decision,
not a social work decision within the gift of local councils. We want the same
support being given to fostered children for ALL children leaving care. Not to do so is a political decision based on
resource allocation, and government ministers are responsible for that. Failure
by politicians to take affirmative action will have a negative and potentially
disastrous impact on young care leavers in the community. An unpalatable fact
for politicians and their advisors, but nevertheless true. Further, to support
one group of care leavers and not another based upon placement only is
discrimination. That is the bottom line.
Mr Timpson
declined to meet representatives from ECLCM. That is a pity, because our offer
to assist him to support all young people leaving care was genuine. The offer
remains on the table.
No comments:
Post a Comment