Panel: The panel comprises an independent chair, a social worker and at least three independent members from different backgrounds and makes a recommendation as to whether approval for the proposed placement of a child should be given. This conclusion is then passed to the agency decision-maker (ADM) who makes the final decision. Panels are also responsible for various other functions, such as carrying out periodic reviews of foster carers, terminating fostering and adoption approvals and matching children with adoptive parents.

Over the years, central government has questioned the need for adoption and fostering panels. The reason for this is not clear and those working in the sector have repeatedly stressed that panels make a valuable contribution to the system, so they have continued to operate. Within a month of the first UK COVID-19 lockdown in March 2020, however, the Government introduced legislation, effective from 24 April 2020 through to 25 September 2020, in what seemed to be another attempt to jettison panels; at the time of writing, it is not known whether, and to what extent, the Adoption and Children (Coronavirus) (Amendment) Regulations 2020 will affect the system.

The intention behind this process is to ensure that, as far as possible, approval is given only to carers who are suited to the role and capable of caring for the child(ren) concerned. To help achieve this, a variety of mechanisms have evolved, including a substantial regulatory framework which (among other things) defines National Minimum Standards in Fostering and Adoption. Several authoritative reference guides are also available, such as CoramBAAF’s Effective Fostering Panels (Borthwick and Lord, 2019) and Effective Adoption Panels (Lord and Cullen, 2016). Furthermore, as a control and feedback measure, the national inspectorate (Ofsted) carries out inspections and publishes annual reports on panel performance, while the Independent Review Mechanism (IRM) provides a channel for potential carers to challenge panel decisions.

All this is clear evidence that the carer approval process has developed and improved considerably over the years. Yet it is far from perfect and many aspects could be better.

One fundamental concern is the effectiveness of panels. While their aims may appear clear – namely, to make objective recommendations on the suitability of prospective adopters and foster carers – it is equally the case that panels often fail to achieve the required level of objectivity. This is because they are made up of individuals and individuals are prone to making subjective judgements without always giving due regard to evidence provided by the documentation presented. This can lead to flawed recommendations.

Of course, this kind of judgemental behaviour is not the ‘fault’ of the people concerned; it is usually unconscious and is part of the basic behavioural make-up of human beings. Individuals are naturally, and almost unavoidably, swayed by (unconscious) biases in their decision-making. This tendency is supported by a large body of research that has been carried out over the past few decades, some of which is specifically relevant to social work. Munro’s (2008) examination of the descriptive and prescriptive approaches to decision theory and decision-making in child protection is a particularly pertinent example. She concluded that it is not possible to avoid the biases of human reasoning; we