Tuesday 6 October 2026
Afternoon EditionRSS
ZOTPAPER

News without the noise

ZOTPAPER
World

Rise in babies in care proceedings raises fears of unnecessary adoptions, experts warn

Data shows care proceedings for infants up 64% over two decades; new guidance for family court judges expected before end of year

By LineZotpaper
Published
Read Time2 min
The number of infants in England involved in care proceedings before their first birthday has reached persistently high levels, with one in 118 babies affected, according to new data from Lancaster and Oxford universities. Experts say the 64% rise over two decades means many babies may have been unnecessarily removed from their birth families, and new guidance to reduce short-notice care hearings is expected before the end of the year.

Data from the universities of Lancaster and Oxford shows care proceedings for babies have risen by 64% over the past two decades, with one in 118 infants affected in 2024-25. The figures peaked during the Covid pandemic before dropping slightly and plateauing.

While there are cases where it is unsafe for parents to continue contact with their children, experts told the BBC's File on 4 Investigates programme that many babies may not have needed to go into care if support had been in place. Since very young children who enter care are more likely to be adopted than older children, there are concerns that some may have been permanently separated from their birth families unnecessarily.

The BBC understands that new guidance for Family Court judges, intended to significantly reduce the number of short-notice care hearings — held within hours or days of a baby being born — will be announced before the end of the year.

§

Analysis

Why This Matters

  • The high rate of care proceedings among infants directly affects vulnerable families and the children themselves, raising questions about whether the system intervenes too readily rather than providing support.
  • If some babies are unnecessarily removed, it could lead to permanent separation from birth families through adoption when less drastic alternatives might have worked.
  • The promised guidance on short-notice hearings signals that the judiciary is aware of the issue, but the impact depends on how rigorously it is implemented.

Background

The rise in care proceedings for babies has been tracked over two decades by researchers at Lancaster and Oxford universities. The data covers England and shows a sharp increase during the Covid pandemic, followed by a slight decline and then a plateau. The Family Court system deals with care applications where local authorities seek to remove a child from their parents due to concerns about safety or neglect. Very young children, if removed, are far more likely to be adopted than older children, making early intervention a particularly weighty decision.

Key Perspectives

Child protection experts and researchers: They point to the 64% rise and argue that many cases could be avoided if families received adequate support. They are concerned about unnecessary permanent separation from birth families. Family Court judiciary and local authorities: Their primary duty is to protect children from harm. They may argue that the rise reflects better identification of risk, and that short-notice hearings are sometimes necessary to ensure safety. Critics/Skeptics: Some may contend that the system remains too cautious and that adoption provides stability for children who cannot safely remain at home, outweighing the risks of delayed intervention.

What to Watch

  • The content and timing of the new Family Court guidance on short-notice care hearings, expected before the end of the year.
  • Whether the rate of care proceedings for babies starts to decline once the guidance is in place.
  • Any government announcements about additional funding for family support services, which experts say could reduce the need for proceedings.

Sources

Zotpaper

Written by software from the reporting listed above, scored by an automated standards desk, and published without a person reading it first. If something here is wrong, tell the editor and it will be put right.

How we workReport an errorSubscribe