“Prospective adopters did not share their negative views of Leiland-James and there was no awareness of the nature of the private text messages shared between the prospective adoptive mother and father.” The review, published on Thursday, said social workers and other professionals were too happy to take what the Castles said at face value and there needed to be “improved direct questioning of other children living at home to listen to the daily their experiences and to understand what life is like for them.”
Castle ‘misled and lied to social workers’
Responding to the report, John Readman, the executive director for people at Cumbria County Council, said: “Castles went through a full eight-month assessment and approval process which included criminal record checks, multiple references and extensive training. No concerns were raised by anyone, in any agency, about their suitability to become adopters. “What we now know, from the trial and this review, is that Laura Castle deliberately and repeatedly misled and lied to social workers about vital aspects of her life. “We also now know that relevant information about Laura Castle was not shared between the agencies and that more could have been done to clarify some of the information we were given. “If the full picture of Laura Castle’s life was known, then the assessment of her suitability as an adopter would be better able to consider the vulnerabilities and potential risks of adoption.” Professor Sarah O’Brien, head of nursing at NHS Lancashire and South Cumbria Integrated Care Board, said: “Ensuring that professionals openly and proactively share information throughout the adoption process is vital and we are saddened and disappointed that the review has points out a number of gaps where it needs to be improved. “A lack of robust information sharing continues to be seen in child death reviews nationally and for Leiland-James, information sharing was not good enough at all critical stages of the adoption process.”
