Mr. Bernard Gloster:

Honestly speaking, my level of familiarity with the report comes from what was in the media. I have not been briefed on the detail of the report. Voluntary care arrangements with parents and our entire child protection practice are driving towards "signs of safety". We are not caught up as much in trying to prove or disprove something but rather we focus on a current assessment of the risk of harm. We try to work with the network of the family around the child to reduce that risk of harm and, I hope, increase the likelihood of the child remaining at home or within the extended family network.

Where children come into care, there are two provisions under the relevant Act, with one being a voluntary agreement and the other being a court order. I am not in a position to dispute people's assertions on this but I would genuinely find it almost the antithesis of social workers in the profession to knowingly engage in a sort of coercive process. Certainly, social workers would explain to parents that a voluntary care option is available and it avoids the need for courts. In many cases there is the possibility of reunification.

The question was asked as to whether parents get legal advice. I will restate my advice across the agency that even where a parent is consenting to a voluntary care arrangement, it is our responsibility to drive the parent in the direction of appropriate independent advice apart from us, whether it is legal or in another profession. It is a significant step in the life of a child or parent so it is not a decision one would take lightly. Do parents feel they are under pressure to go into a voluntary arrangement? I have no doubt that could well be the case. Thinking about attachment issues and trauma arising for a family when a child leaves its front door, there must be an immense range of emotions, views and feelings about that. If a parent said to me today that he or she felt there was no choice, I would be very slow to argue with them if that was the feeling. Is it our staff's intention to create that type of "coercion"? I sincerely hope that would not be the case.