NFJO highlights evidence on number of mothers and fathers who experience recurrent care proceedings in England and Wales

May 6, 2025

The Nuffield Family Justice Observatory (NFJO) has published a report highlighting evidence on the number of mothers and fathers who experience recurrent care proceedings in England and Wales, their circumstances and the impact of having children removed in this way.

The report, published this month, outlines five key areas for reflection from the research: prevalence of recurrent proceedings, circumstances of parents, impact of removal, services designed to respond to the issue of recurrent proceedings and effective ways of working.

‘Recurrent care proceedings’ refers to the cycle of parents returning to court on many occasions and having children removed into foster or kinship care or, more commonly, being adopted.

Outlining the prevalence of this occurring, the report notes that 1 in 5 of all mothers in England and Wales who appear in care proceedings are “at risk” of returning to court with a new baby within 10 years, and 1 in 8 fathers are at risk of returning to court within 5 years.

The research also revealed that mothers who first appeared in care proceedings after 2014 are more likely to return to court compared to mothers whose first proceedings were before 2014.

However, the report pointed to research by Alrouh et al. [2022], which found that despite “growing evidence” about recurrent care proceedings, data on the numbers and prevalence of recurrent cases is not collected nationally or locally, making it harder to ensure that “sufficient resources and support” are made available to address this issue.

Outlining points for reflection, the NFJO recommended the consideration of the following questions:

Do you know what the situation is in your area in relation to recurrent care proceedings?
If data is not currently available, have there been discussions with local authorities and Cafcass or Cafcass Cymru about analysing local data?
Is the issue of recurrent proceedings discussed at your local Family Justice Board?
Are there other multi-agency forums where it could be discussed?

Turning to available evidence on the circumstances of parents involved in recurrent care proceedings, the report notes that these parents share “many characteristics” with each other and with other vulnerable parents who are involved in care proceedings.

The NFJO said: “They have experienced significant and multiple adverse experiences in their own childhoods, and are likely themselves to have been in the care system as children. These adverse experiences include abuse and neglect, exposure to domestic abuse, loss, rejection, and instability in living arrangements, starting in childhood and continuing into adulthood.”

Meanwhile, research carried out in 2017 and 2021 showed that mothers and fathers who experience recurrent care proceedings are likely to have “long-standing” physical and mental health problems - with the issues giving rise to concerns about harm to their children commonly including substance misuse, mental health problems and domestic abuse.

The NFJO observed: “For mothers and fathers who are involved in recurrent care proceedings, the pattern of adverse experiences throughout childhood and into adulthood means that many of them are dealing with complex and unresolved trauma, which is then compounded by the trauma of having their children removed through care proceedings.

“The impact of such trauma and adversity often also leads to parents falling through the nets of support and being seen as ‘hard to reach’ or ‘difficult to engage’. For fathers there is the additional problem that they are more likely to be quickly identified as ‘risky’ rather than vulnerable.

“As a result, parents can miss out on family support services for themselves and their children, on treatment services for substance misuse, on mental health services, and on attention to physical health problems, including sexual health.”

The report highlighted the following points for reflection:

Are family justice professionals in your area familiar with complex trauma and its impact?
Is non-engagement by parents a factor presented in the evidence by professionals in care proceedings? Is this label ever challenged?
What evidence is there of professionals attempting to engage parents in ways that take account of their trauma histories?
Is attention paid to the impact of poverty on parents in the evidence of professionals in care proceedings?

Turning to the impact of removal, the report noted that when a mother has had one child removed from her care and goes on to have another child removed, the second set of proceedings tends to start earlier (shortly after birth) and to conclude more quickly than the first set of proceedings.

Further, studies found that the gap between proceedings can often be very short, and it is not unusual for subsequent proceedings to be issued before the end of the first set.

The evidence that subsequent proceedings are more likely to be concerned with babies, and that nearly half of applications concerning newborn babies involve mothers who have had previous involvement in care proceedings, means that the mothers and fathers caught up in recurrent proceedings will be involved in pre-birth assessment processes.

The NFJO observed: “There is no national guidance on prebirth assessments, and a literature review linked to the Born into Care studies and other research have shown wide variation in practice by local authorities and health partners across England and Wales. […] Concerns about pre-birth assessment practice have been raised in a number of judgments considering the removal of babies from their parents.”

The report noted that as part of the Born into Care research, good practice guidelines for health, social care and legal professionals have been developed and piloted in eight local authorities.

The report highlighted the following questions for consideration:

Do you know what the pre-birth assessment practice is locally?
Is there a focus on intervention, rather than just on assessment?
How much does the past history of the parent affect the evidence provided and the outcome of the proceedings?
Expert assessments often recommend specific psychological or other support for parents. To what extent do mothers and fathers receive such support once proceedings are finished?
Are you aware of the Born into Care guidelines for good practice?

Looking at services designed to respond to the issue of recurrent care proceedings, including initiatives such as the Family Drug and Alcohol Court (FDAC), report authors warned that these services are “relatively few in number”, and the majority are “small in scale”.

The NFJO pointed to research which found that due to the limited number of services available, and the “limitations of their reach” given staffing numbers, the services are unlikely to be reaching enough parents to reduce overall national statistics on recurrence.

The organisation added: “Positive findings from evaluations of services suggest that there should be much greater focus on wider rollout of such services across England and Wales.”

3 points of reflection were outlined as follows:

Do you know whether any such services exist in your area?
Do you know what the referral criteria for such services are?
Are there opportunities for the providers of the service and the parents who have benefitted from the service to talk about the work to judges, magistrates, Cafcass, Cafcass Cymru, lawyers, and others involved in the family justice system?

Finally, looking at effective ways of working, the NFJO pointed to a resource pack containing research information, practice tips and case studies - developed for areas wishing to set up services for parents who have experienced recurrent proceedings.

The organisation recommended local areas to consider how family justice professionals can support the development of local services, and to consider whether any existing services are “available and accessible” to parents from minoritised communities.

Lottie Winson