Charity calls for funding of advocacy services if children are to exercise rights under Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Act

Looking at deprivations of liberty and ‘relevant accommodation’, the charity described the current landscape, where increasing numbers of children are subject to deprivation of liberty orders and held in inappropriate settings, as “deeply concerning”.

It said in a statement published last week (1 May): “Efforts to bring greater structure and oversight to these arrangements are, in principle, welcome. But the introduction of new forms of ‘relevant accommodation’, without clear definition, leaves fundamental questions unanswered about oversight, accountability, and the care and treatment that children in these settings will receive.

“A decision to deprive a child of their liberty under section 25 of the Children Act 1989 is a recognition that a child is extremely vulnerable and at risk. That these children may now be confined in settings other than secure children’s homes, including in privately run for-profit provision, represents a significant and troubling shift.”

The charity observed that secure children’s homes are specifically designed, regulated and staffed to meet the needs of children at the highest level of risk.

It warned: “Introducing ‘relevant accommodation’ risks undermining this established framework and legitimising the use of inappropriate placements, rather than addressing the underlying need for greater investment in specialist secure provision.”

Turning to children’s access to advocacy, the charity welcomed the introduction of a duty to consider children’s wishes and feelings in family group decision making.

However, it also outlined the “critical” importance of independent advocacy - noting that the implications of the Act point to a “clear and growing need” for children to have access to independent support to understand and exercise their rights across a range of situations, including care planning, leaving care arrangements, and deprivation of liberty.

The charity warned: “The revised National Standards for the Provision of Children and Young People’s Advocacy Services were due to set clear expectations about when advocacy should be proactively offered, including in many of the circumstances affected by this legislation.

“The ongoing delay in their publication is of great concern. Their publication, alongside sufficient investment in advocacy provision, will be essential if the rights set out in the Act are to be realised in practice.”

Article 39 added: “If this Act is to lead to meaningful change, the focus must now turn to how it is implemented. This includes ensuring that children are supported to understand and exercise their rights, that advocacy is available with appropriate funding and resources, and that new forms of provision do not lead to a further dilution of safeguards.

“Children’s rights cannot depend on a placement lottery. What matters now is whether this legislation becomes a foundation for meaningful change or another moment where the system moves forward, but not far enough for the children who need it most, particularly those in institutional settings who are so often overlooked.”

The Department for Education has been approached for comment.

Lottie Winson