header-logo header-logo

09 October 2024
Issue: 8089 / Categories: Legal News , Child law , Public
printer mail-detail

Rethinking social care for disabled children

The Law Commission has proposed an overhaul of the ‘out of date’, ‘inaccessible’ and ‘potentially unfair’ law on provision for disabled children

Its 343-page consultation paper, ‘Disabled children’s social care’, published this week, covers the rules governing whether a disabled child can get help from social services to meet their needs, what help they can get, how they get it and how they may transition into adult social care. Typical help includes professional carers who visit the child at home, respite care, community activities or provision of special equipment. Alternatively, direct payments could be made so the parent can purchase these themselves.

Currently, under s 17 of the Children Act 1989, a disabled child is a child who is ‘blind, deaf or dumb or suffers from mental disorder of any kind or is substantially and permanently handicapped by illness, injury or congenital deformity’. The Law Commission points out this definition is from the 1940s and lags behind present-day understanding of autism and neurodiversity.

Moreover, current law is not only complicated but scattered throughout an array of Acts of Parliament, regulations, court decisions, government guidance and local authority policies. The Law Commission highlights that, since the law stipulates that local authorities provide the services required, whether a child’s needs are met or not depends on where they live.

The consultation paper poses questions on how disability should be defined, what remedies should be available when things go wrong, whether the current framework for care should be replaced, and whether there should be national eligibility criteria for disabled children’s social care.

Professor Alison Young, commissioner for public law, said: ‘The children who need help from social services have changed over time as our awareness and understanding of particular conditions has developed.’ 

The consultation closes on 20 January 2025.

Issue: 8089 / Categories: Legal News , Child law , Public
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll