We underestimated danger to baby Faith, say social services

The “dangerousness” of a relapse by Julia Lovemore was “underestimated”, according to a serious case review published yesterday.

The independent probe for Cambridgeshire Local Safeguarding Children Board also found the relationship between Faith Lovemore’s parents’ religious beliefs and their mental health was “only partially understood”.

But bosses in social services and also at the county’s mental health trust said it was unclear if doing things differently would have avoided the tragic outcome.

The review said the agencies involved had worked well together and made four recommendations – which have already been implemented.

In the report, in which the young victim is described as “F”, author Clare Chamberlain said childbirth was known to be a high-risk period for mothers with psychotic illness.

She said: “The high risk of relapse of a psychotic episode for F’s mother was known, but the potential dangerousness of her behaviour during such an episode was underestimated.”

Ms Chamberlain also said family history should be used to assess risk, noting that it was a common tendency for the risk of neglect to take prominence over physical abuse.
 
On the subject of religious beliefs and mental health, Ms Chamberlain said: “It was the link between the two that was not sufficiently articulated.”

While the investigator concedes the Lovemore case is “unusual”, she said “particular attention” would be needed in other cases in future.

The fourth recommendation called on agencies to be “absolutely clear” about which member of staff is visiting, and when.

Annette Newton, director of operations at Cambridgeshire and Peterborough NHS Foundation Trust, said the review recognised the Lovemores had not been left to their own devices.

And she defended the decision of Joetta Fox and Rebecca Hughes to leave the property when they visited on June 17 last year.

She said: “The decision they made was that their being there might have exacerbated the situation. It was a reasonable decision based on what they knew at that point, and it was important to get the people that could have taken action.

“Nobody predicted things going wrong quite that quickly.”

 Mrs Newton said staff had asked whether doing things differently would have prevented the tragedy.

She added: “I can’t emphasise what a tragedy this was, and of course as an organisation we have to look very carefully at what happened, and what we can learn to possibly prevent it happening again.”

Gordon Jeyes, director of children’s social care at Cambridgeshire County Council, and vice-chairman of the safeguarding children board, said the risk was thought to be that the Lovemores would not engage if the children were unwell, not that the children would be physically harmed.
 
The speed of Julia Lovemore’s mental condition was also unexpected.

He said: “I am not convinced, even with the benefit of hindsight, that this could have been predicted or prevented.”

The Kidscape charity said the case highlighted the need for “better communication” between child protection agencies.

And the National Association of People abused in Childhood said it was “shocking” that risks identified before birth were not properly acted upon.

Sarah Kelly from the group said: “This was a failing of the services involved.”

Det Supt Dan Vajzovic, who led the police investigation, said: “This was a tragic case which saw a young life ended deliberately.

“Every child has the right to be protected and feel safe in their own home and it is a parent’s responsibility to ensure this is the case.”