safety plan & long term foster care

[poundedskate7]

Hi, So a quick run down, children in LTFC since care orders granted in Feb 2024, we applied to discharge care orders in March 25 and had the hearing in June, from those proceedings the la tried to make out we had told the children they are coming home soon, we denied this, it was briefly mentioned in court in our questions to the SW but with it being a discharge hearing it wasn't fully addressed
Anyway the SW upped our supervised contact to fully supervised, and recently they sent us a safety plan to sign that now states we were overheard telling the children they are coming home so a slight difference, i asked for evidence of this but none given only that i am to sign the form asap or lose family time at the end of October, is this right? i told them i would sign to acknowledge but not accept the entries as it feels like it was an escalation due to court proceedings and not based on fact. Thoughts on this?

Also in LTFC i know its active till the child turns 18 but should the SW and any professional working with out children be telling them they won't be returning home till they are 18? especially when we have a roadmap/reunification plan?

[Winter25]

You’re absolutely right to question this. What’s happening here isn’t about safety , it’s about control and record-building. You’re being pressured into signing something inaccurate, and that’s not acceptable. Below is a fact-based plan you can act on right now.

So what’s really going on here...

Changing the wording is a red flag...
They originally claimed in court you told the children they were coming home. You denied it. Now the phrase “we were overheard” appears in a document, that shift from allegation to supposed “fact” suggests they’re trying to fix their version of events in writing. That’s not transparency, it’s record manipulation!

Threatening loss of contact is coercion, simple as that..
A safety plan is meant to be a collaborative tool, not a contract you’re forced to sign. Linking your children’s family time to signing a disputed document is unlawful pressure and undermines the purpose of a care plan.

Telling the children they’ll be in care until 18 is wrong on many levels
No professional should make statements like that when a reunification plan or discharge application exists. It damages trust, causes emotional harm, and directly contradicts their duty to promote family relationships.

What to do next

1. Do not sign in agreement!!!
You can acknowledge receipt only, write clearly next to your signature:

“Signed for acknowledgement only, I do not agree with the accuracy of the information recorded.”

That keeps you cooperative but protects your position.

2. Put everything in writing.
Send a formal email to the social worker, their Team Manager, and copy in the Independent Reviewing Officer (IRO). Here’s a version you can send directly:
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Formal Objection – Inaccurate Information and Coercion in Safety Plan

Dear [Social Worker’s Name] and [Team Manager’s Name],

I acknowledge receipt of the proposed safety plan dated [date]. I am unable to agree to the current wording for the following reasons:

The statement that we “were overheard telling the children they are coming home soon” is inaccurate. I have requested evidence for this, and none has been provided.

I have been told that failure to sign the plan may result in the suspension of family time. Using contact as leverage to secure a parent’s signature would be improper and contrary to Section 34 of the Children Act 1989.

Professionals have reportedly told our children that they will remain in care until they are 18. This contradicts the reunification plan, is causing the children distress, and undermines the work being done towards positive family restoration.

I am willing to sign to acknowledge receipt only, with a written note confirming my disagreement. Please confirm that this statement will remain attached to the record.

I also ask for written confirmation that our family time will continue as planned and that this matter will be reviewed by the Independent Reviewing Officer to ensure compliance with the current care plan.

Kind regards,
[Your Full Name]
[Your Contact Details]
----------------------------------------------------
Why this approach works

It keeps you calm and factual while proving you understand the law.

It calls out the pressure as unlawful without sounding combative.

It forces written accountability from both the social worker and manager, with the IRO copied in.

It protects your contact rights and prevents them from twisting your words later.

=========================
For full transparency, I am not an official adviser for this forum. I am a parent who has been through a long and successful legal battle with a local authority, and I am here to offer supportive, strategic advice based on my own lived experience. The information I share is for guidance, and it is always up to each parent to decide what is right for their own situation.

[poundedskate7]

Hi So we told the sw that we would sign it for acknowledgement only and he refuses us to do that, he did state he would cancel the next family time but after a few emails he reverted to saying that family time will go ahead next week but at a contact centre, seems a step backwards and all because we raised issues during court about the conduct of foster carers and other issues and now this is to basically fit in with his new updated roadmap that he thinks is court endorsed when it wasn't, its not in any court orders i have seen

so will maybe have to sit in a contact centre for 4 hours with not much activities for the children so not sure how that is in the best interests of the children....

we have sent a stage1 complaint to the council so see what they say....probably nothing

[Winter25]

Hi poundedskate7,

You are absolutely right to be concerned. What is happening now is not ordinary case management, it appears to be retaliation for challenging the Local Authority in court. This is a misuse of safeguarding powers and it must be formally recorded as such.

What Their Actions Really Mean

Contact is being downgraded (moved to a contact centre) without any new safeguarding incident.

This change has not come from a court order, it is being imposed on the basis of disagreement over wording in a safety plan.

They are refusing to let you acknowledge receipt without agreeing to content, which is completely inappropriate.

This is not about risk, it is about control and record building.

The Law Is On Your Side

Under Section 34 of the Children Act 1989, contact must not be suspended or downgraded unless it is necessary to safeguard the child. There must be new, current evidence of risk, not speculation, not disagreement, and certainly not as a consequence of you asserting your rights.

Additionally:

The social worker’s personal “roadmap” is not law. Only what is in the court order is legally binding.

Telling children they won’t go home until 18 when reunification is part of the care plan is not only misleading, it is emotionally harmful and contrary to their duty to promote family relationships.

What You Need to Do Next

Now is the time to escalate this formally and in writing, with the Independent Reviewing Officer (IRO) copied in. The IRO has a legal duty to challenge any Local Authority actions that are not compliant with the care plan or court order.

Here is the draft email to send:
----------------------------------------------
Subject: Formal Objection to Contact Downgrade and Request for IRO Intervention

Dear [Social Worker’s Name], [Team Manager’s Name], and [Independent Reviewing Officer’s Name],

I am writing to formally object to the decision to move our family time back to a supervised contact centre following my refusal to sign the safety plan in agreement, despite confirming I would sign for acknowledgement only.

For the avoidance of doubt, I remain fully willing to cooperate and work in partnership, but I cannot sign to agree to statements that are factually inaccurate and disputed.

My concerns are as follows:

There has been no new safeguarding incident or evidence of risk that would justify a change in contact arrangements under Section 34 of the Children Act 1989.

The change appears to have been made solely because I challenged inaccurate statements in the safety plan and raised issues about case conduct during court proceedings.

Using contact as leverage to obtain agreement on disputed wording is coercive and contrary to statutory guidance.

The social worker's proposed “updated roadmap” was not endorsed by the court and does not appear in any court order. Therefore, it cannot lawfully override existing arrangements.

This change is not child-focused. The children will now be placed in a restrictive contact setting with limited activities, which is not in their welfare or emotional interests.

I am therefore requesting:

Confirmation of the new evidence or safeguarding concern relied upon for this decision;

Identification of where this change is authorised in the court order or care plan;

That the Independent Reviewing Officer urgently review this matter in accordance with their statutory duty to ensure decisions remain lawful, proportionate, and consistent with the child’s care plan.

We remain committed to the reunification plan as set out by the court and expect contact arrangements to reflect that trajectory—not be regressed based on procedural disagreement.

I look forward to your written response.

Kind regards,
[Your Full Name]
[Case reference or child initials]
-----------------------------
Why This Works

It is calm, factual, and rooted in statute.

It forces them to justify their decision with evidence (not opinion).

It brings the IRO into the conversation, which is critical , the IRO is your independent safeguard.

It creates a paper trail that can be used in court later if needed.

If they fail to provide a lawful reason, or ignore this, you will then escalate to Stage 2 complaint and the IRO dispute resolution process.

You are absolutely right to challenge this. This is not how lawful safeguarding is done, and their actions must now be held to account.

[Suzie, FRG Adviser]

Hi So we told the sw that we would sign it for acknowledgement only and he refuses us to do that, he did state he would cancel the next family time but after a few emails he reverted to saying that family time will go ahead next week but at a contact centre, seems a step backwards and all because we raised issues during court about the conduct of foster carers and other issues and now this is to basically fit in with his new updated roadmap that he thinks is court endorsed when it wasn't, its not in any court orders i have seen

so will maybe have to sit in a contact centre for 4 hours with not much activities for the children so not sure how that is in the best interests of the children....

we have sent a stage1 complaint to the council so see what they say....probably nothing

Dear poundedskate7

Welcome back to the parents’ discussion board. Thank you for your two recent posts. I am Suzie, Family Rights Groups’ online adviser. I will reply to both posts here.

I am sorry to hear that you continue to have difficulties with the plans for your children who are in care and that there have been changes to the contact arrangements for them.

You explain that during the recent court proceedings when you applied to end the care order for your children, the local authority stated that you had told the children they would be coming home soon. Since then, they have asked you to sign a safety plan where it states that you were overheard telling the children they would be coming home soon. You have asked for but not received clarification of this. The social worker initially suggested that if you did not sign the new safety plan then you would not have family time with your children in October. The social worker has since confirmed that your contact will go ahead. You have not signed the safety plan as you dispute the reference to you allegedly telling the children they would be coming home. The social worker refused to accept your proposed acknowledgement.

You have now made a formal complaint. That is the right thing to do if you dispute what has been said and how children’s services managed the situation. I am sure that you have detailed the matters that you are unhappy about in your complaint where children’s services should investigate them. As the complaint is at stage 1 so you should receive a response within 10 working days. Please see our explanation of the complaints process here. You can escalate your complaint if you need to.

Your next family time with your children is due to be fully supervised at a contact centre which you see as a backwards step. If children’s services are concerned that the children are distressed or destabilised because of their parents’ comments or behaviour, then they have the power to change existing contact arrangements if they assess this to be in the best interests of the children. This could be about keeping them emotionally safe and settled. Children’s services are required by law to allow ‘reasonable contact’ between parents and their children. The decision is down to children’s services as they have the majority share of parental responsibility for the children. So, they can decide that supervised contact in a contact centre is reasonable.

However, you rightly raise concerns about how your 4 hours supervised family time in a contact centre will be supported and how the children will experience it. I would suggest that you check with the social worker/contact supervisor/contact centre what facilities and activities will be available and that you propose what games or resources you would like to bring to make this an enjoyable experience for the children. You should also check with the social worker how/when you will receive a record of the contact and when this will be reviewed. You could ask for an early contact review meeting and for the social worker to set out what their expectations are for the family time arrangements to revert to how they used to be. I understand that this may form part of your current complaint. As you know, it is often a good idea to copy in the social worker’s team manager and the IRO into any correspondence about contact issues.

You are understandably very determined to have the children returned home to your care. You have recently asked the court to end the care order which unfortunately they did not agree to. Did the court make any recommendations? The care order, as you have said, remains in place until the children are 18 unless ended sooner. You can continue to keep reunification on the agenda and to work towards this by engaging with the professionals and the Looked After Children processes.

I hope this is useful.

If you would like to speak to an adviser, please call the freephone advice line on 0808 8010366, Mon to Fri, 9.30 am to 3.00 pm. Or post back if that is better.

Best wishes

Suzie