CHILD CARE (SCOTLAND) (Hansard, 7 May 1980)

§ Mr. Allen Adams (Paisley)

I beg to move, That leave be given to bring in a Bill to define the grounds on which local authorities in Scotland can assume parental rights; and for connected purposes. You will well remember, Mr. Speaker, my first attempt to introduce legislation into the House. At that stage the vast majority of right hon. and hon Members rose from their places and walked out. With that in mind, I am attempting to tailor this piece of proposed legislation to suit the more discerning of hon. Members. I note that they have all remained in their seats.

The purpose of the Bill is simple and specific. It is an attempt to make more specific a law that I believe to be vague and too open to subjective opinion. I refer, of course, to the right that local authorities have at present to assume the parental rights of a child where they consider that that child is at risk.

At the outset I reiterate that I do not think that these powers are abused, by and large. However, there is a phrase in present legislation that is open to abuse, although it is not generally abused. At present the law says that the local authority may assume the parental rights of a child where it considers that the habits and mode of life of the parents are not conducive to the proper upbriging of the child. What does that phrase mean? The phrase " habits and mode of life " of the parent would mean a different thing to you, Mr. Speaker, and to me. It would mean something slightly different to every hon. Member in the House. In other words, it it is far too vague and far too open to interpretation. Although it is rarely abused, it could be abused, and I know certain cases in which it has been used simply to take a child away from a domestic situation because the social worker involved has basically disagreed with the life-style of the parents.

Frankly, that is not good enough. Taking a person's child away from him or her is a major and sometimes irrevocable step. There should be no grounds for subjective opinion. Of course, there always will be subjective opinion, but as far as possible we should seek to remove it and replace it by fact. I suggest that 286 the phrase " habits and mode of life " is far too open to opinion and abuse, and therefore should be removed from the law and substituted with certain specific grounds.

Local authorities should not be able to assume the parental rights of the child unless they have a clear-cut specific case that they can spell out clearly in court. The first ground would be the failure to nourish the child; the second, the failure to clothe the child; the third, the failure to educate the child; the fourth the failure to provide shelter for the child. The fifth and sixth grounds would be deliberate physical maltreatment and deliberate mental or psychological maltreatment of the child.

I also wish to include another ground, which would spell out quite clearly that it is not acceptable to society for parents to abandon young children, particularly those under 5 years of age, on the streets after 9 or 10 o'clock at night. Regrettably, one can walk around many of our major cities and see very young children—children of 2, 3 or 4 years of age—roaming the streets of our major housing estates very late into the evening. That is not civilised behaviour. Animals in the fields do not behave like that, and it is quite legitimate for the House to say that that is not acceptable behaviour, but is, in fact, a statutory offence. In fact, if it occurred on more than three occasions after counselling, it should be said that the parents relinquished the right to look after their child. Quite clearly, by abandoning that child in the street they have already relinquished that right.

Taking someone's child into care is a major step, and very often it is a bigger and more serious problem than people imagine. At present, in Scotland, between 60 and 70 children are taken into care each month. In other words, we are assuming the parental rights in 60 or 70 cases a month. That is a very serious situation. When we do that we must have clear and specific grounds for so doing, and there should be as little room for error as possible.