A sense of proportion

William Green, Trinity Chambers

This article examines the critical role of proportionality in care proceedings, specifically regarding care and placement orders. Proportionality dictates that state intervention must be necessary to achieve a legitimate objective and not impose an undue burden on individual rights. The author argues that crossing the legal "threshold" for significant harm should not automatically lead to adoption; instead, the court must maintain a "sense of proportion" and view the "bigger picture".

Central to the discussion is the 2025 case Re N, where an adoption order was overturned. The Court of Appeal found the trial judge failed to consider risk mitigation—such as nurseries or nannies—wrongly accepting that only 24/7 supervision would suffice. Citing cases like Re B and Re L, the text reminds practitioners that family ties should only be severed in "exceptional circumstances" and that society must tolerate "barely adequate" parenting. Ultimately, the author warns against a "linear approach," urging rigorous analysis of support services to ensure the final care plan is the most proportionate outcome.