Facts: F’s brother and sisters had been taken into local authority care because of parental neglect and the risk of sexual abuse on the part of adults with whom the parents had associated; but F was over 16 and so could not be made subject to a care order. Nonetheless, her mental age had been assessed as between the 5- to 8-year-old range and she was highly vulnerable. The local authority therefore applied for a guardianship order, under section 7 of the MHA 1983 (which would give the authority the power to prevent F returning home) and for an order displacing F’s father as her ‘nearest relative’.

Judgment: the Court of Appeal (Evans, Thorpe and Mummery LJJ) held that section 7(2) of the MHA 1983 permitted a guardianship application to be made on the ground of ‘severe mental impairment’ but, as defined in section 2, that also required there to be abnormally aggressive or seriously irresponsible conduct. F’s determination to return home could not be construed as ‘seriously irresponsible’ as she had given cogent reasons for wishing to return home, which is what the great majority of children taken into care did, as soon as they were able. It would have been preferable if the local authority had invoked the wardship jurisdiction, as F had remained under 18 years of age; that jurisdiction was child-centred and considerably more flexible.