Estimates of the number of children living in some form of kinship care in the UK vary, as does the definition. But the figure could be as high as 160,000 – around twice the number that are looked after by local authorities. In a minority of cases there is overlap, with relatives becoming foster carers. But despite their large number, these households have a lower profile, in policy terms, than more formal care arrangements.
That might be changing. As the local authority care system has become more dysfunctional due to funding cuts, increasing numbers of unaccompanied children arriving in the UK and the damaging effects of marketisation, it is being suggested that kinship carers could offer a solution – or at least part of one.
Josh MacAlister is one high-profile advocate for this view. Appointed by the government to carry out an independent review of children’s social care in England and Wales, he produced a report that recommended strengthened support for kinship carers. Mr MacAlister cited evidence of better employment and health outcomes for children cared for by relatives, and a stronger likelihood of sibling relationships being maintained. The government has responded positively, announcing a small amount of new funding. A new national strategy is promised by the end of this year.
Big variations in the prevalence of kinship care arrangements in the UK and internationally indicate that there is a role for policymakers in setting the conditions in which such decisions are made. In Scotland, around 30% of looked-after children are formally placed with kinship carers, which is significantly more than in England and Wales. In some European countries, the proportion is over half.
Arrangements range from guardianship orders made by courts to informal agreements. The definition being consulted on by ministers includes care offered by friends as well as relatives, and the difficulty for the government is how to create a framework that benefits everyone. Tensions include where a relative is forced to make a choice between accepting parental responsibility for a child and becoming a foster carer, thereby gaining an entitlement to financial and other forms of support. A new kinship carer’s allowance, as recommended by Mr MacAlister, looks like a way out of this dilemma, and should be tested. Data showing that more than three-quarters of kinship carers live in deprived areas is all the more reason to act.
Kinship carers should gain an entitlement to paid leave from work, like adopters, and access to support networks backed by local authorities. It makes sense to require Ofsted to consider kinship care when inspecting councils. More research is also needed.
But it would be a mistake to see the increased use of family placements as any kind of quick fix to the many problems with the children’s social care system. If a child’s best interests, in most cases, are served by being kept close to existing networks – friends, schools, places they are familiar with – this must be possible within the formal care system as well as outside it. Promoting kinship arrangements must not become an excuse not to address the grave problems that are caused by a failing social care market, which includes the tendency of private care operators to set up homes where property is cheapest. Anyone expecting aunts or grandparents to pick up the pieces not only of damaged families but of a broken system will be disappointed.