« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
Regulation 14, 15 and 16
Question 24: Are the procedures for notifying the person seeking adoption support sufficient?
Most respondents agreed that the procedures for notifying the person seeking adoption support are sufficient and comprehensive.
One of the respondents did not agree with the proposal to send a notice of the proposed decision and a support plan in draft and then to send out a second letter confirming the decision. They would have thought that just one letter with their decision could have been sent, but still allow representations afterwards.
Concern was also expressed about the amalgamation of allowances and support provision in these regulations. The respondent was unclear about the overall policy intentions and further sates that, "Allowances are an agency function and 'agency' is used in the regulations about them. But the regulations about support services refer to local authorities, although they are acting as agencies."
Some of the comments made included:
Terminology
"Giving notice sounds directive rather than working together. If those present have been involved in assessing need and this is done by joint discussion, is this the best way forward by giving notice and then adopters giving representation?"
"This part seems to be drafted in excessively legalistic language - it is not easy to understand the purpose of what is being suggested here. Clarity needs to be given to this section. Also, is the agency's decision final? Is there an appeal mechanism?"
"The notification system has to be clear for agencies and for children and families and we do not think that it is."
Timescales
"It would help if there were an established timescale on making such representations "
"The notification system also has to have clearly prescribed timescales in the regulations so that agencies and families know what they have to do and when."
"Notice of proposed decisions seems fair in Regulation 14. If there is agreement between parties, this should be acknowledged, as there may be no need for representations."
Appeals
"No mention of appeal mechanisms for adopters re assessment for support?"
"There is no proper 'appeal' system about decisions. The reference to representations does not say what these are, how they may be made and what timescales there are."
"Consideration should be given to having a further right of appeal within the agency/local authority. Local authority systems for Community Care decisions should be looked at for models."
Procedure
"Is it necessary to have a system of proposals and then decisions? We do not think that this two-tier system is the best method of proceeding with service provisions. We would again recommend that the model of Community Care notifications is looked at. Local authorities are familiar with that model."
Support or allowances
"There is confusion in reg. 14(3)(b), (e) and (f), and in reg. 15(3), between allowances and adoption support systems. These regulations talk about assessment for adoption allowances and other aspects of them, but allowances are not part of the adoption support assessment system in the regulations . In addition, the earlier regulations deal with conditions and intimations about them."
Question 25: Is the information to be included in the notices and final notification satisfactory?
Most respondents agreed that the information was satisfactory and comprehensive.
Some comments made include:
Care needs to be taken to ensure that data is not shared inappropriately here. Whose needs are being met? Is there an appeal process?
Notification should identify where and how decisions have been made; and who will review any representations regarding the proposals. This will be important to the people who are dissatisfied with the decision.
Must be given access to full copies of all reports submitted not just summaries.
The information required should be similar to that required for Community Care decisions.
Scottish Government response
The majority of respondents supported the procedures set out in these regulations, and the information to be included in the notices, therefore we do not propose to make significant changes. We will attempt to address the issues raised in question 24 as follows:
Terminology
The primary legislation uses the term "notice" and this has been drawn down to the regulations to mean notification in writing. The adoption agency should inform the person requesting an assessment of their proposed response. In using notice we have indicated that this will need to be in writing. An alternative would be to draft the regulation to indicate this in long hand, however we feel that using a pre-defined term is more appropriate. The terminology also mirrors that in England and Wales and therefore ensure cross border consistency of approach.
Timescales
Currently the regulations leave the setting of a timescale for representations up to the decision of the adoption agency. We felt that this was the most appropriate option given the potential for urgency in certain circumstances. However, some respondents suggested that this should be set in regulations so that all parties are aware of what is required. We will make changes to the proposed legislation to make the place a minimum timescale for making representations rather than a maximum timescale. This will mean that parties know that representations must be made within a certain timescale, which must still be specified by the agency, but that this will be at least 2 weeks from the notice of the proposed decision.
Where agreement is met during the decision process representation could be made on receipt of the notice rather than wait for the end of the timescale.
Appeals
Representations about the support plan and allowances proposed by the local authority are likely to be made when the requested service or allowance is not being granted. The representation will act as an appeal process in its own right. However, if a person is not happy with the outcome of that representation then they can follow the complaints procedure of the adoption agency as a further route to appeal. We do not think it is necessary to set out a new appeals process in these regulations.
Procedure
As indicated, the procedure for notifying of a proposed provision of service or allowances, followed by the final confirmation of this provision allows for an appeals process to be heard before the plan is put in place. The procedure also follows that in England and Wales to ensure that we have a consistency of practice.
Support or allowances
Some confusion was raised about whether these regulations referred to adoption support services or to allowances. It was also raised that regulations on allowances have already got provisions for intimation of the decisions and representation of the adopters.
The currently drafted regulations include provision for notifying adopters of the outcome of a reassessment of needs, and require the person in receipt of the allowance to agree to certain conditions prior to the allowance being granted. However, they do not currently provide for notifying the person of a decision in relation to their request for allowances, nor do they allow for representations about that initial decision. That is left for regulations 14 and 15 to cover.
Therefore, both regulations 14 and 15 will apply to adoption allowances too, and this will be made clear in the regulations. As indicated, support services and allowances are not linked, although a payment can be paid in lieu of a service.
Question 26: Does this regulation give adequate provision for the giving of notices under these Regulations?
Most respondents agreed, with additional requests such as "it should be made clear that adoptive parents of children, irrespective of their age, should also receive the notice." Only two respondents disagreed with the regulation.
Comments made by respondents included:
"We do not agree with notification of allowances to children of any age. If it is insisted that this provision be kept in then it should be added "if the child is of insufficient age or understanding""
Another respondent thought that it wasn't appropriate to give notice of an adoption allowance and all financial details to the child. But suggested that it may be a case of only sharing certain parts of an adoption plan with certain parties to the plan.
"Adoptive parents should also get the notification until the young person is 18."
"For a child over 12 in all cases a copy should be sent to the adoptive parents."
"Should be sent to both parent and child if over 12."
One respondent suggested that;
"When the child is 12 or over, s/he should be notified unless not appropriate, as set out in reg 16(2).
When the child is under 12, the regulation should say that the local authority/agency must in each case consider whether to notify the child, and should only not notify the child when they/it considers it is not appropriate to do so."
Question 27: Should children under the age of 12 who are considered by the adoption agency to have sufficient understanding, be given notices under this regulation?
While most respondents agreed that children under the age of 12 who are considered by the adoption agency to have sufficient understanding, be given notices, there were a few views that were not in favour of this, stating that benefits are notified to parents and not to children.
The comments included:
"If a child is deemed to have legal capacity they should receive age appropriate information/notices."
"The adoption agency should consider the understanding of all children and ensure they are given notice of adoption services as appropriate. It may not always be appropriate for the parents or carers to get a copy e.g. if the parents or carers have no continuing involvement in the placement. They should only get a copy where it directly relates to their role in relation to the placement and/or the support being offered."
"It is probably that adults will be requesting a service and they should get the response. However, if a child/young person requests a service the response should go to the child, but they are not financially responsible. It might be more appropriate to state 16 if age needs to be stated."
"Notices can be worded appropriately, may give some reassurances to child…"
"Whilst the children should be involved in any planning they are still a child and decisions should be made by the parent."
"this was a contentious issue as on one hand it acknowledges children's rights to information about themselves, however, on the other it could include detailed information that, on a practice level, may present some difficulties."
General Comments on Regulations 14, 15 and 16 included:
"The circumstances in which a child aged 12+ would receive a notice are unclear. Would this only be where they were the person requesting the adoption support plan or more generally where they were the recipient of the plan? If the latter, there are some circumstances in which a notice might not be appropriate, e.g. issues concerning adoption allowances, issues concerning parents who were looking for support in managing a young person's troubling behaviour. This is not so much related to the child's age and maturity, but to parents' right to receive a confidential service."
"These (regulations 14, 15 & 16) seem unnecessarily cumbersome and Regulations 14 and 15 would be better combined."
"It could be less cumbersome by stating that local authorities must take the person's views into account in making decisions about whether to provide adoption services."
Scottish Government response
The general principles of regulation 16 were agreed with by most respondents. However, concern was shown in responses to both questions relating to this regulation about the provision of information to a child. It may be that some confusion about who is entitled to know about support plans and allowances has caused these concerns.
In both regulation 14 and 15, the notification of proposed support services or allowances, and the final decision, are to be given to the person who requests the support service or will be subject to the adoption allowance. Therefore, the adopted child will only get notification when they request a support service, rather than at every request from persons under s9 of the 2007 Act.
« Previous | Contents | Next »