A local authority has come under fire for 'one-sided actions' after it removed a baby from her mother's care.
The Local Government Ombudsman (LGO) said social workers at North East Lincolnshire Council had handed the child to the father without fully communicating the situation to the mother, who was suffering from post-natal depression.
The mother had taken the child home following a doctor's appointment after which social workers visited, took the baby away and warned her other children could be taken into care if she did not co-operate. 'At no point had social workers told the mother the baby could not be returned to her care,' said the LGO's report.
It added the LGO’s investigation found 'the council’s one-sided actions in supporting the father having custody meant the women did not know whether the baby would be able to live with them at least part-time until a court reached a decision about her residence...This was a full nine months after she was sent to live with her father.'
The council has been asked to apologise to the family, pay £6,000 to the mother for distress caused and a further £1,000 to the child's grandmother.
Dr Jane Martin, LGO, said: 'The actions of North East Lincolnshire Council’s children’s services department were disproportionate, arbitrary and misleading and led to months of uncertainty and the mother to feel aggrieved because the council’s support for the father having custody was one-sided.
'Any decision to remove a child from their family is difficult and likely to cause significant distress to all involved. This is why it is all the more important that parents can see they were treated fairly, the process was followed properly, and the outcome was in proportion to the events that necessitated it.'
Joanne Hewson, deputy chief executive of North East Lincolnshire Council, said: 'Complicated family situations like this are always very difficult to deal with and sometimes very complex, particularly where people are vulnerable and have difficult personal issues to face – a fact acknowledged by the Ombudsman in her comments on the report- and we would stress that at no point were any of the children involved harmed.
'As always, we had the child's best interests at heart in dealing with the matter and believed at the time that balanced steps were being taken to resolve the situation by placing the child into her father's care; however, while we have some misgivings about the interpretation of some of the facts contained in the report, we acknowledge that in this case our practice did not meet the high standards we expect and therefore we accept the ombudsman's findings.
'Since 2012, a number of changes have already taken place to address the matters in the report, but nevertheless, we will review its findings in full in and take whatever further steps are necessary to improve our procedures going forward.'
