10,992 entries for Inspections - State

As explained earlier, the primary reason children were taken into care over the past 35 years were categorised as the parent’s inability to cope or care for their children (see timeline). Again, the most recent (2005) categories are used in figure 18104 below to show the ‘family problem’ reasons for which children were taken into care; one significant shift is the increase in the number of children taken into care in response to the ‘abuse of drugs and/or alcohol’ by a family member since the mid-1990s (shown in dark green). Figure 18: Primary reason for admission to care, stock figures for family problms, 1978-2005

Most children taken into care for ‘child problems’ were categorised as either abandoned or rejected by their parents105 or were awaiting adoption106; a sizeable proportion were also recorded as being ‘out of control’. Figure 19: Children in care by primary reason for admission to care, stock figures for child problems, 1978-2005

There is no data available on family forms in the annual reports for 1978-81; however, there is evidence from the statistics on reason for admission, that children of single mothers or lone parent families in general are over-represented in the care system. For example in 1978, 389 children were reported to be taken into care due to being the child of an ‘unmarried mother, unable to care’ and in 1979, all children awaiting adoption (257) were apparently children of ‘single mothers’. Figure 20 below shows the family structures of children in care from 1982 to 2005. Lone parents consistently make up the largest category followed by married couples (either living together or apart). Figure 20: Children in care by family structure, stock figures, 1982-2005

Classifications and counting methods vary considerably from year to year in the annual reports published by the Department of Health on children in care. Such frequent, and for the most part, unexplained changes complicate what ought to be the rather basic task of outlining and interpreting trends in the provision of alternative care for children over time. However, the different ways in which children are categorised and their families categorised also serves to illuminate the perceived ‘problem’ of non-nuclear family forms; in particular, unmarried mothers and their ‘illegitimate’ children. The timeline shown below in figure 21 is illustrative of the many changes in categorisation used in the Department of Health reports over the period 1978 to 2005. The excessive focus on unmarried mothers can be seen by mapping the descriptions of such women over time in relation to the reason their children were taken into care (shown in black) as well as the descriptions of the child’s ‘status’ or family background/type (shown in red). Figure 21: Changes in Department of Health Annual Reports Disclosure, 1978-2005

For example, according to the Department of Health Report, Children Coming Into Care 1978, the first such national survey of children in care of the health boards, the primary reason children were taken into care or placed under supervision107 for that year was that they were children of ‘unmarried mothers who were unable to care’ (p 4). This category represented around a third (33.8 percent) of all children taken into care by the State and is only followed by the ‘short-term illness of parent/guardian’ which represented 16.5 percent of all children taken into care in that year. Some other noteworthy reasons for children being taken into care that same year include: unsatisfactory home conditions (8.6 percent); parent/guardian in prison/custody (1.8 percent); travelling family (3.4 percent).

In 1979, once again children of single mothers are recorded as being the single largest group of young people placed in care. Correspondingly, the most common reason for children being taken into care was ‘single mother, unable to care’ (28.5 percent). However, three other primary reasons for admission were also focused on single parents, including: single mother, child-awaiting adoption (7.9 percent); parent deserted, remaining parent unable to care (10.5 percent); parent dead, remaining parent unable to care (6.2 percent).

Taken together, children of single parents in these four categories represent over half (53.1 percent) of all children in care of the State. In addition to the focus on single parents, two new reasons for admission listed in the 1979 report reinforce the moral judgment of parents: marital breakdown (5.8 percent); inadequate parent (12.5 percent).

The 1979 report also includes an interesting survey of ‘underlying family problems’. Such additional descriptive information is rare in Department of Health Reports and provides an insight into the reasoning behind children being taken into care; once again it highlights the emphasis placed on the perceived ‘problem’ of single mothers. According to this survey, by far, the leading underlying family problem was perceived as ‘parental inadequacy’ (47 percent). Table 13 of the report cross tabulates the underlying family problems with the primary reason children were taken into care. Almost 20 percent of children taken into care were categorised as the children of ‘single mother(s), unable to care’ due to being ‘inadequate parent(s)’. Despite the fact that the report presents unusually detailed information on why children were taken into care, it is nonetheless limited by tautological thinking, as the second largest group in the table are described as children of ‘inadequate parent(s)’ whose underlying problem is ‘parental inadequacy’. Fifty seven children were reported to be living in a home with an ‘unsuitable moral atmosphere’; representing 1.7 percent of the children in care.

The 1979 report also provides more detail than many of the other Department of Health Reports on Children in Care in the last 30 years in its explanation for some of the reasons children were placed in residential care. By far the two primary reasons were that the child had two or more siblings already in care or that there were no suitable foster parents available. The number of children placed in residential care for ‘other’ reasons was also quite substantial. These other reasons were primarily that the child was either born in an institution or was born to a ‘single mother undecided about caring for child’. Interestingly, one case was recorded in which the mother was deemed to be ‘disturbed’ and another was recorded as having been a child ‘born during honeymoon’.

The 1980-81 report continues in the reporting of ‘underlying’ family problems such as ‘inability to cope’ and ‘marital disharmony’. However, a number of new family problems appear in the report including: drug addiction; promiscuous environment; over protective.

It is not until 1982 that background information is reported separately in specific regard to the family structure of children in care. While being the child of a ‘one parent family unable to cope’ was still the single largest reason for being placed in care (37 percent), the number of children placed in care for this reason actually decreased by 10 percent from the 1981 figure. The report further grouped children into three ‘status’ categories: ‘legitimate’; ‘illegitimate’; and, ‘extra-marital’.108 A little more than half of children in care during 1982 were recorded as legitimate (57 percent), and tended to be placed in long-term residential care (46 percent of all legitimate children). On the other hand, children who were categorised as ‘illegitimate’ or ‘extra-marital’ tended to be placed in long-term foster care (44 percent and 66 percent respectively). Interestingly, around 10 percent of all ‘Illegitimate’ children were placed in private foster care compared to less than 1 percent of either ‘legitimate’ or ‘extra-marital’ children.

By 1984 these categories had once again changed and children were either recorded as ‘children of married parents’, ‘children of unmarried parents’ or ‘children of married women where husband is not father’. Children of ‘one parent families unable to cope’ still represented around a third of children in care. The 1985 report continues in the use of these categories and is the last report published until 1989. In the Department of Health report on children in the care of Health Boards for 1989 the specific focus on ‘unmarried mothers’ is not as evident as in previous years. Instead, the more inclusive language of ‘one parent unmarried’ is used; according to the report, this ‘means an unmarried mother or father who is not living with a partner’. Significantly, this is also the first year that the category of parents deemed ‘unable to cope’ (still the largest group at 31 percent) are not specifically identified as unmarried or single parents. The categories used are then consistent for the next three years until 1993 when, once again, a three-year gap in annual reporting occurs. When the next annual report was finally published again in 1996 the term ‘lone parent’ had come into use and ‘parental illness’ had been combined into the ‘parents unable to cope’ category of principal reasons for admission to care. Despite these changes, it remained that around a third (32.96 percent) of children were taken into care for this reason.

There is no data for 1997 but the 1998 report indicates that the percentage of children from lone parent families increased to almost 40 per cent (38.58 percent). Also, worth noting is that this is the first year that ‘parent unable to cope’ (26.58 percent) was not the dominant reason for children being admitted to care; ‘neglect’ (26.71 percent) accounted for slightly more cases (five more children and a difference of less than half a percentage point). The term lone parent has been further qualified in recent years (since 2002) to highlight the distinct group of lone parents who are unmarried as opposed to divorced or widowed. In 2005, the most recent year for which statistics are available on children in care from the Department of Health, 2,221 or almost half (43 percent) of children in care that year came from ‘lone parent, unmarried’ families.109

From the 1920s to the early 1950s there were in excess of 8,000 children in various forms of residential care (Industrial Schools, Reformatory Schools, Approved Schools/institutions and private orphanages) and a further 4,000 children, either boarded-out (public foster care) or at nurse (private foster care). During the mid-1950s, the numbers in alternative care dropped rapidly and by the end of the 1960s, there were just over 1,200 children boarded-out or at nurse and approximately 3,000 in various forms of residential care. The trend towards the decline in the number of children in care (defined as children in various forms of foster care and residential care) continued throughout the early to mid-1970s, but increased somewhat in the late 1970s. A decline was evident again in the early 1980s, but the number of children in care has been rising steadily since the mid-1980s, with currently over 5,000 children in State care. While the overall number of children in care grew from the mid-1980s onwards, the type of care placement shifted decisively from residential care to foster care. By 1980, there were slightly more children in foster care than residential care; in contrast, currently 84 percent of all children in care in foster care (including relative care). Put simply, while the overall numbers of children in care have increased, the role of residential care has become increasingly atypical and specialised while foster care has moved to a position of dominance in the provision of alternative care for children.

Also worth noting, is that the numbers of children entering care were relatively stable during the late 1970s and 1980s, but quite suddenly grew dramatically in the mid-1990s. The reasons for this are unclear, but in part reflect the gradual implementation of the Child Care Act 1991 and the increase in the number of social workers. Certainly, a substantial increase is recorded in the number of children entering care for reasons of ‘neglect’, from over 600 in 1992 to over 1,400 in 2005, which reflected growing awareness of different forms of child abuse during this period. The legal basis for children in care shifted substantially in the late 1980s, with slightly more children in care on the basis of a care order than on a voluntary basis. However, by 2000, a slight majority of children in care were there on a voluntary basis, but in recent years, the numbers are almost equal. In terms of gender, almost equal numbers of males and females are in substitute care.