System 'failing children in care'

Children in care are written off by the education system, with nearly eight out of 10 gaining no qualifications, children's charity Barnardo's says.
Its Failed by the System report assesses the experiences of the 80,000 children looked after by councils.

A survey of 66 children found they had multiple placements and school changes, which Barnardo's says is common.

The government said reforms within its education White Paper would help cared- for children reach their potential.

'Cycle of disadvantage'

Barnardo's chief executive Martin Narey said: "The cycle of disadvantage that haunts these children as they grow up shows no sign of being broken as they enter adulthood.

* More than half reported being bullied at school as a direct result of being in care.

* Four out of 10 said no-one had attended their school parents' evenings.

* Nearly half said no-one went to sports days or other school events.

* The number of care placements young people had lived in varied between one and 30 - half had been in more than four placements.

* More than half were not currently in employment, training or education.

* Almost half the group had attended six or more schools and 11% had attended more than 10.

David Cameron should make helping children in care a top priority

A system guaranteed to damage babies
If you want to adopt, you're better off in America

First, an apology, to David Miliband and his wife, Louise: the last thing they will want to see today is a column in The Times about adoption. But behind the private arrival this week of their second adopted son, Jacob, there is an important public issue.

A fair amount has been written in the past two days, under cover of faux concern about a diplomatic faux pas, about the Foreign Secretary's failure to show up for a meeting with his Saudi counterpart when Jacob arrived two weeks early. Don't believe for a second that this is about diplomacy: can you imagine anyone raising even an eyebrow let alone a banner headline were a politician to cancel a meeting because his wife was giving birth? The story simply provides cover to report a second adoption by the Milibands of a baby born in America. The family was rightly upset by suggestions, when they adopted their first child, Isaac, three years ago, that they had somehow abused Mr Miliband's position as a Cabinet minister to fast-track the adoption.

It was utter rot: his wife has dual nationality and so the Milibands are entitled to adopt in the US. Every person I know who wants to adopt a child would jump at the chance of adopting there if they were only entitled to. It isn't true either that authorities in the States allow parents to “buy” a baby; what they ask is that you pay the mother's medical expenses, which can run into tens of thousands of dollars.

The moralisers should stop criticising the couple and ask a different question instead: why is it that a British foreign secretary and his wife, a professional violinist, are unable to adopt a young baby in the UK? Why, when there are thousands of babies under the age of 1 in the British care system, did they have to go to America at all?

There are about 60,000 children in care at any one time, more than a third of them under 10. The vast majority are taken in because of abuse, neglect or dysfunctional families; it isn't their fault. Nobody reads them bedtime stories and they are ten times more likely to be excluded from school than other pupils. One teenage girl in care described her dream: “Mum would be in the kitchen cooking dinner with the washing machine going. I would get a drink from the fridge and go into the front room to watch TV.” As Ms Sergeant wrote, the very banality of the dream is a rebuke.

The State is too unwieldy a parent. Children, particularly abused and frightened ones, cannot be funnelled through a rigid system. Knowing as we do how bad the State is at looking after the kids entrusted to it, we ought to be encouraging the earliest possible adoption through the swiftest, simplest route. Yet government policy turned recently from encouraging more adoptions to improving the lot of children in care.

While a children-in-care Bill forms a central part of the Queen's speech next week, new money ring-fenced under Tony Blair for local authorities to increase adoptions stopped last year, since when there has been a 12 per cent drop in adoptions. The number of looked-after children adopted under the age of 1 has also fallen steeply. This side of the Atlantic, the State wins.

Actress Samantha Morton has accused the Government of treating convicted paedophiles better than children in care.

The star - who grew up in a succession of children's homes - said she was disgusted by the apparently cushy conditions on a sex offenders wing she visited while filming her new role as killer Myra Hindley.

Seeing the comfortable cells equipped with satellite TV and all mod cons made her blood run cold, she said.

The prison which angered her was HMP Wymott in Preston, Lancashire, where she was filming scenes for the forthcoming Channel 4 drama Longford.

It is home to hundreds of sex offenders. "I was really disgusted with one prison we were filming at," said Morton, 29.

"We were allowed to film in a normal wing. Then I walked through some grounds, where you had this beautiful lawn, to another wing.

"As I walked down I could see each room had portable tellys, Sky TV. They had these amazing kitchens. Other prisoners get treated abominably but this new wing was totally fantastic with all mod cons.

"I said, 'Who are they?' and they said, 'Oh, they're the paedophiles'. I felt cold all over." Morton, star of TV series Band Of Gold and Hollywood blockbuster Minority Report, went on: "I grew up in care. I spent my whole life in care until I was 16.

"The way they treat children in children's homes is appalling, yet these paedophiles have Sky telly. That shocked me.

"I saw two sides to prison. It was something that shocked me beyond anything, considering how they treat our young people."

Describing her early years, she said: "I was a young person who grew up in the care system. We had no carpets, no nice beds, nothing. We got £10 a year for Christmas presents. The budget was stretched.