Teenager's baby returned after judge criticises social workers

A teenage mother whose baby was removed by social workers at 4am yesterday, two hours after his birth, won him back by lunchtime after obtaining an emergency high court order.

Mr Justice Munby ordered social workers to hand him back immediately. The judge said that "on the face of it" social services officials from Nottingham city council, who "should have known better", acted unlawfully in taking the baby from hospital without obtaining a court order.

Ian Wise, appearing for the mother, said the baby was taken without the mother's consent after hospital staff were shown a "birth plan" prepared by social services. The plan said the mother, who had a troubled childhood and suffers from mental health problems, was to be separated from the child, and no contact allowed without supervision by social workers. But the judge ordered that - provided there is no court order and the mother remains in hospital - social workers and the NHS trust must "take the necessary steps to reunite mother and baby forthwith".

The mother, referred to as G, now faces a legal battle to remain with her child. Wise said she intended to fight to keep her baby. The judge described the situation as "most unfortunate". He said no baby can be removed simply "as the result of a decision taken by officials in some room".

Removal can be lawful only if a police constable is acting to protect a child, or there is a court order. The judge said doctors and midwives could not have been expected to understand this and acted as they did when faced with "a bit of paper." He said: "The professionals involved in this case should know better.

"There is no suggestion in the documents shown to me so far that the risk the mother is posing is a risk of exposing the child to immediate physical attack and physical harm."

The mother's solicitor, Stuart Luke, from the firm Bhatia Best, said: "Mother and child were reunited 46 minutes after Mr Justice Munby's order at 12.09. She now faces the prospect of an application by the local authority social services for an interim care order, which will be vigorously contested."

Luke added that her claim had been amended to include a claim for damages. It is likely to be heard this morning by magistrates.

The case was heard on the same day as the court of appeal granted an unmarried mother - whose child was put up for adoption against her will - the right to challenge her treatment in the courts. The 22-year-old woman argued that her human rights had been breached when she was represented in court by the Official Solicitor, who consented to a care order, after a psychiatrist decided she lacked the mental capacity to instruct solicitors. She was unable to speak at the final hearing, rebut claims or give evidence. Her appeal against care and placement orders will now be heard by the court of appeal.