The government and the courts have been in conflict over adoption for months. The decision in re B-S (children)  eventually lead to Sir Martin Narey issuing a mythbuster about what the decision really meant. The report in the Independent suggests that his intervention has had no effect.
In considering the case the court drew three key points:
• That although the child’s interests are paramount, those interests included being brought up within the child’s natural family – is there a family member or friend who could care?
• That the statutes impose a requirement that the court “must” consider all available options when coming to a decision; and
• That the court’s assessment of the parents’ and kinship carers capacity to care for the child should include consideration of the support that the local authority could offer them to care for the child.
The court reinforced the approach to be taken by judges in indicating that there must be proper evidence setting out the reasons for and against adoption.