I helped promote abused children’s entitlement to criminal injuries compensation and a local authority’s duty to make application on behalf of children in their care. Both your editorial (6 November) and Simon Jenkins (Opinion, 7 November) assert that any compensation received would alleviate the burden on the council and be to their benefit. The implication is that councils are pursuing these applications in their self-interest. Upon what evidence are these statements based? My understanding is that any award would be directly to the child concerned. While it may be put in trust until the child achieves majority, it could not simply be used by the council to offset any costs of its statutory duty of care.
In raising the matter as far back as 1988, I sought to highlight the parlous situation of many children leaving care with little support, financial or otherwise. Would your writers not wish to pursue any avenue that might benefit a child who has suffered harm at the hands of another person? The issues of whether a foetus can have a legal identity and whether a crime has been committed are difficult, but it’s wrong to criticise a council for seeking to further the interests of a child in its care if there is an arguable case. For them to do otherwise would truly be a proper cause for concern.
Peter Ferguson
Castle Heather, Inverness
• As a lawyer working in care proceedings, I frequently represent children who have been damaged by their mother’s abuse of alcohol while pregnant. In other cases I act for the for mothers and can see both sides of the problem. The use of inverted commas around the phrase “foetal alcohol syndrome” almost implies Simon Jenkins is sceptical about this condition, perhaps implying an invention of fee-hungry lawyers? Foetal alcohol damage is seen on a spectrum – foetal alcohol spectrum disorder – and is one of the largest undiagnosed causes of mental health problems and behavioural issues in this country. For a child to be diagnosed with full foetal alcohol syndrome, rather than foetal alcohol spectrum disorder, indicates a high-level of permanent brain damage and must be taken more seriously.
David Jockelson
Solicitor, Miles & Partners LLP
• Contrary to your editorial and Joanna Moorhead (Don’t turn these mothers into criminals, 6 November), this matter is not about criminalising the birth mother. It is about supporting the child born from that situation throughout their often very challenging life as a result of the injury received in the womb, and who indeed should be liable for compensation from the criminal injuries compensation scheme. These children often come through the care system and are brushed off to unsuspecting adoptive parents, who have little or no idea of how this will impact upon their family lives. These parents become people who can no longer work because their child cannot attend mainstream schools, for whom no specialist schools exist, and who struggle with their hampered development, their constant rages and their damaging behaviour.
Invariably all these parents want to do is get their child through to adulthood in one piece – a challenging task. I am one such parent. I sit in roomfuls of parents exposed to similar difficulties. It is not rare. We struggle alone, turned away by child and adolescent mental health services and with local authorities telling us there is no funding to support us beyond a few kind words and a couple of “parenting” courses. If the only route is criminalisation, so be it. At least this will put the plight of many families up and down the country in the limelight and these children might finally get the help they need.
Name and address supplied
