Care proceedings for babies under one year old in England have risen by 64% over the past two decades, and experts fear the trend is moving too far in the wrong direction. The latest figures show one in 118 infants affected, according to data from the universities of Lancaster and Oxford, up to 2024-25.
The numbers peaked during the Covid pandemic before dropping slightly and plateauing. But the worry is not just about the count. It is about what happens next — whether the state removes a baby and hands them to new parents without fully considering whether the original family could have kept hold of them.
The Scale of the Problem
Care proceedings for babies under one year old have climbed sharply over the past two decades. The Lancaster and Oxford data shows the rise puts the current rate at one in 118 infants affected.
The 64% rise over two decades is a sustained increase, not a temporary blip. The most recent figures show a plateau after the pandemic peak, but the rate remains at a persistently high level across England.
Most adoptions, more than 90%, went ahead without parents’ written consent, per CoramBAAF. Courts overruled parents’ wishes in just under half of those cases; the rest were “unopposed.”
About 10% of adoptions in England are made with written consent from birth parents, according to CoramBAAF. That means the vast majority of adoptions happen without the biological parents agreeing to them.
Grey Area Cases
Prof Karen Broadhurst from Lancaster University estimates between a fifth and a quarter of cases were “clear-cut” where a child had suffered serious harm or abuse. The majority of cases, she says, are “grey area” cases of neglect by families with complex needs, including drug and alcohol abuse and housing issues.
Social workers assess whether there is enough past and present evidence of future risk of harm to children. The grey area is where the judgment call gets hardest — where a family is struggling but has not yet caused lasting damage, and where support might change the outcome.
Some babies may have stayed at home if families had received the right support, experts tell File on 4 Investigates. That is the central tension in the figures: whether the state removed a baby because it had to, or because it could.
A Mother’s Story
One birth mother, Jean, describes her daughter’s adoption as “forced.” Her local council says it followed a lawful process.
Jean was separated from her daughter for 16 years after Tye was taken into care at 11 weeks old and adopted at two. Tye found her mother on social media when she turned 18.
The case is being used by experts as an example of what can go wrong when the state steps in too quickly. It is not presented as proof that all care orders are wrong — Broadhurst’s estimate suggests most involve real harm — but it is a reminder that the consequences of a bad decision last a lifetime.
The Baby P Case
The Baby P case in north London and the Sara Sharif case in Woking, Surrey, are cited as extreme, high-profile reminders of the stakes. Both remain points of reference for anyone discussing care proceedings for infants.
The cases are presented as reminders of what is at risk when the threshold for intervention is set too low, not as proof that all care orders are wrong.
What Judges Will Soon Face
New guidance for Family Court judges to reduce short-notice care hearings for babies within hours or days of birth will be announced before the end of the year. The move is aimed at slowing down decisions made in crisis moments, when emotions run high and information is thin.
Short-notice hearings are common in care law. A parent may be told their baby is being taken from them with little warning, and the judge must decide whether to grant the order immediately.
The Numbers Behind the Decision
| Measure | Current Figure | Trend |
|---|---|---|
| Babies in care proceedings under one year | One in 118 infants affected | Up 64% over two decades |
| Adoptions of children entering care before turning one | 72% of adopted children in England | Per latest government figures |
| Adoptions with written parental consent | About 10% | According to CoramBAAF |
| Unopposed adoptions | More than 90% | Per CoramBAAF |
The pattern in the figures is consistent. Care proceedings for babies have risen. The figures show the system is handling more of these cases than it used to, and the margin for error is getting smaller.
The government and adoption organisations say adoption should be a last resort. Yet the figures show courts regularly overriding parents’ wishes. The question is whether the system is asking the right question at the right time.
What Experts Want
The British Association of Social Workers told the BBC its members are doing their best amid rising caseloads and reduced resources. That is a defence of the frontline workers, not a defence of the outcomes.
The grey-area cases are where the tension sits. Families with drug and alcohol problems, housing issues and other complex needs often fall into that category. Support can help some of them, but not all. The question is which ones get a second chance and which ones do not.
The stakes are high. A wrong decision can separate a mother from her child for 16 years. A right decision can save a baby from abuse.
The Guidance and Its Limits
The guidance on short-notice hearings is a step in the right direction. It slows things down when they need to be slowed. But it does not address the underlying question: how many of these babies are being removed because they needed to be, and how many are being removed because the system could.
The hope is that the guidance helps. The hope is that the experts keep asking the questions. And the hope is that the system remembers that taking a baby is not a victory — it is a loss, for everyone involved.
Source material: “Rise in babies in care proceedings raises fears of unnecessary adoptions, experts tell BBC,” the BBC.
Get the Notebook.
The day's best stories and every fresh verdict, in plain English, in your inbox by seven. One email a day, no more.