A three-year-old boy who was put up for adoption because his mother refused to testify against his abusive father has been returned to her care, a family court judge has decided.
The boy was removed from his home more than two years ago because he was being exposed to domestic violence.
But a court heard the mother finally left her partner – and recorder Carly Henley said the boy can return home but should not see his father.
Social workers had intervened when the boy, who cannot be named, was a few months old, said the judge at the family court hearing in Newcastle upon Tyne.
His father had been facing prosecution for abusing his mother and was placed in the care of a relative after his mother said she would not support a prosecution of his father (stock photo)
His father had been facing prosecution for abusing his mother and was placed in the care of a relative after his mother said she would not support a prosecution of his father.
Evidence showed that he was being ‘exposed to parental domestic abuse’ and at risk of physical and emotional harm.
The judge said the boy’s parents, who are both in their late 20s, both had criminal records and histories of drug misuse.
But she said the woman was no longer with the boy’s father and had changed.
Council social services bosses had planned to seek permission to place the toddler for adoption but reconsidered after the woman changed her ways.
The judge said the woman had ‘engaged well’ with a support worker, kept her home to a very high standard, and tests had shown that she was clear of drugs and alcohol.
Evidence showed that he was being ‘exposed to parental domestic abuse’ and at risk of physical and emotional harm (stock photo)
She said the woman had been seeing her son regularly and had a good relationship with him causing social services bosses to change their minds about adoption.
They thought the woman could now care for the boy – with help from social workers.
The judge said the boy’s father should not have any contact with him.
He had not seen the boy for more than a year and had ‘disengaged’ from family court proceedings, she said.
The judge analysed the case at a recent private family court hearing in Newcastle upon Tyne and outlined detail in a written ruling published online.