A Critical Analysis of Lynette's Case and Its Impact on Child Welfare

Background on Lynette's Situation

A critical and comprehensive understanding of the law and its application to practice drawing on a range of legal sources as well as debate. 

Lynette is a 36 year old single mother of two children, 15 year old Tomas and 6 year old Sophie. The children’s father Burak is coming to the end of a prison term for a serious assault on Lynette. Despite living apart Lynette continued to be subject to domestic abuse until Burak’s imprisonment. Lynette has a history of depression and alcohol misuse, which started in her teens. She has engaged with various addiction services over the years. Lynette has been admitted to hospital voluntarily for treatment for bi-polar disorder but has also been detained under the Mental Health Act (1983) (2007) when she tried to end her life by way of suicide when mentally unwell. Lynette has little contact with her family and her mother died when she was 12. Lynette has talked about early experiences of physical and emotional abuse in her own childhood when she and her sister who had learning difficulties went to live with their paternal Aunt. Lynette appears to have been managing her mood and her use of alcohol for the last couple of years and family life has been more stable for the children whilst Burak has been in prison. Despite this Lynette still has difficulties regulating her emotional responses, which has resulted in her not being able to manage her frustrations with her children and having unreasonable expectations of them, particularly Tomas.

Lynette has received parenting support from a family support worker and understands the impact that her own childhood experiences had upon her, but she shows little ability to consider the needs of her children when she is distressed or when she has been drinking, resulting in episodes of neglect of their physical care and environment, and emotional unpredictability. Burak has a long history of chronic alcohol dependent and poly-drug use, and drug dealing which has resulted in several prison terms. Lynette believes that alcohol and drug use has been instrumental in his violence toward her. Lynette has started to talk about wanting to keep her family together and wants him home on his release from prison. She believes that the children need a relationship with their father who has never hurt them and that he has changed his behaviour. Sophie has begun displaying behavioural difficulties at school. She has a provisional diagnosis of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. She is undergoing educational psychology interventions and speech therapy and there has been a suggestion that foetal alcohol syndrome may be a factor in her developmental problems. Subject to child in need plans, increasingly it appeared that Tomas has taken on the role of providing emotional support to his mother and ‘parentified role’ to his sister. Several child protection plans have been put in place over the years, coinciding with Lynette’s episodes of depression and relapse, but the children have never been subject to care proceedings. Paternal family members have stepped in, or the children have been accommodated for short periods on these occasions. Since Burak has been in prison the paternal family have stayed away from Lynette and the children. The school usually notice a deterioration in the hygiene, behaviour and concentration levels of the children in lessons when Lynette has relapsed. Both children’s schools have raised some concerns about attendance over the last few weeks. Tomas has been getting into fights and has been the recipient of online bullying. Lynette has been called to his school but has not attended any of the meetings made to discuss this. Last Friday Sophie attended school with a very severe burn on her forearm. Sophie said that she had been taken to hospital by her mother, where she was treated for a scald, and had to go back to the hospital next week. She would not say anything else. The school’s attempts to contact Lynette regarding the burn were not responded to, and it was remarked that Tomas had been dropping Sophie to school and picking her up recently.

Analysis of Parental Care and Child Protection

Attempts to speak to Lynette by Children’s Services were also unsuccessful, although it was confirmed she attended Accident and Emergency with Sophie and was asked to return to the Burns Clinic for dressings on Monday, which she agreed to do and was given advice on care of the burn over the weekend. Attempts to visit to talk to Lynette and Sophie were unsuccessful and no-one appeared to be at home. Sophie did not attend the Burns Clinic. On Tuesday, Sophie attended school, it was noted that Sophie’s injury was not being properly cared for. Her dressing had not been changed and looked dirty. Sophie told her school assistant that she got burned when she was trying to cook herself some noodles for dinner. When Lynette arrived to collect Sophie from school that day, she told the school to mind their own business and said that Sophie is fine but will not leave her dressings alone and that she has an appointment with the GP that evening. Later that afternoon, Lynette spoke to the social worker and said that she would make an emergency appointment with her GP for Sophie but has not been able to get her to the Burns Clinic. Sophie does not attend although Lynette made an appointment. The next day, Sophie fell ill at school. She was listless and had a high temperature. Although it appeared that a loose bandage had been put over her burn, Sophie complained of pain. Lynette was contacted by school welfare to advise her of Sophie’s presentation and that needed immediate medical attention. Tomas answered the phone and said that Lynette had asked her sister Brenda to come over and take Sophie because he could not look after her. He said Sophie would be staying with Lynette’s sister because his mother has been ill. Lynette confirmed her agreement to the school, and social worker. Brenda picked Sophie up from school and assured them she would be taking care of Sophie and would make sure she received immediate medical attention. She had already contacted the GP who said Sophie should be taken straight to Accidental and Emergency.

The social worker follows this up and makes arrangements to see and speak to Sophie as part of her ongoing enquiries. When she visits, Brenda asks what support she can get to care for Sophie and shows her around the flat. Brenda is reluctant to show her Sophie’s room and says that she needs to buy a new bedding for her. She says she has a new partner Robert who Lynette knows, but he does not live with her, even though the social worker can see male clothes and shaving things in the bathroom. Brenda says Sophie has been wetting the bed and will not do what she is told. Sophie wants to play with the social worker but says she want to go home and see her brother. She hears Brenda tell Sophie that she has got to be good first and do what she is told because her mother cannot look after her if she is naughty. The social worker decides to see Sophie at school next time and talk to Lynette about the arrangement she made with her sister. Sophie was absent from school for a week and although much better physically, was unsettled and tearful on her return. Her teacher put this down to missing her mother and brother. The playground supervisor recognised a man waiting for Brenda to collect Sophie. The supervisor mentioned this to the class teacher when she remembers that Robert’s child was removed from the family’s care because of neglect and a concern of sexual abuse relating to him. Sophie’s teacher speaks with her and Sophie says that she has been staying with Brenda and Rob and their friends because Mummy has gone away. She says that does not want to go back there and wants to live with Mummy and Tomas. She says that Brenda shouted at her not to touch her bandages because she would get in trouble if she got sick again.

Legal Implications of Lynette's Case

She says that Brenda locked her in a dark room with monsters. She said Brenda would not give her any food or let her see brother because she was naughty and wet her bed. Sophie said that Brenda hit her with a coat hanger because she saw Rob coming out of her room; she shows her teacher marks on her arms and legs. The school contact Children’s Services and an initial check reveals that Robert has several convictions under the Sexual Offences Act 2003 for online grooming and involvement in child pornography, and sexual assault of a child. He is on the list of adults who pose a risk to children. Children’s Services decide what action to take. Lynette cannot be found until seven days later when Children’s Services are informed that she was an inpatient in a mental health unit in Birmingham. She has been there since she was brought to hospital by ambulance after concerned passers-by called found Lynette bleeding from a head injury, distressed and confused trying to run out into heavy traffic. Lynette was admitted overnight initially, but her confused state and medical history raised concern about her mental state as well as her physical health. After a physical examination and a mental state examination the next day, the hospital psychiatric team believed that Lynette may be showing signs of brain damage consistent with Wernike-Korsakoff syndrome, delirium from alcohol withdrawal, or injury, but required further tests and observation to confirm this. Lynette refused further treatment or tests and a mental capacity assessment was undertaken with regards to these decisions. She insisted that she wanted to return home to care for her children and partner. She says that she has been living in Birmingham with her mother and younger sister Brenda who has learning difficulties and had just had a baby, but she needs to go back to London now. She has no idea why she is in Birmingham other than this, and insists she fell over after she had too much to drink. She cannot retain information during the conversation she had with the nurses and doctor treating her nor can she appreciate what might happen if she leaves the hospital untreated. When the social worker speaks to Lynette she appears to understand that her children were taken by her sister and accuses the social worker of arranging this. She says that she would never have agreed to this because her sister cannot look after herself.

1. What were the social worker’s responsibilities to Tomas and Sophie, whilst they were in their mother’s care and how would this have been managed?

2. What emergency safeguards were necessary for Sophie and Tomas and how would they be addressed?
3. What were the duties and responsibilities of the AMHP during Lynette’s admissions to hospital?
4. How should issues of mental capacity be addressed in the case study and why is this also relevant to planning for the children?

5. What is the responsibility of the Local Authority to provide support and services to Lynette upon discharge from hospital?