History of Foster Care in England and Wales 1946-1989
The Curtis Report 1946

HOME

The Curtis Report 1946
Fostering/boarding out
Beyond 1948

Like previous legislation and governmental investigations the report set out to highlight the inadequacies of the child care provided under the poor-law, which it was felt, and had been expressed for some time, was nearly a century behind popular, more enlightened attitudes to childcare. In many cases the existing care provided was punitive rather than restorative and nurturing, despite the obvious fact that the child/young person was placed under of the local authority through no fault of their own. Previous government legislation regarding abuse and neglect of children, while highlighting the same problems as the Curtis report, bulked at intervention to the point of extraction of the child from the parent or guardian, which was predominantly, (and massively so) something that only happened when, and if, the parents were stripped of their rights as they entered into the poor-law legislation. The removal of children from parents was just another measure to deter people from seeking relief unless absolutely necessary. Intervention to protect the child was something that seldom happened on grounds of physical abuse or neglect but rather more on the parents ability to financially provide for them.

 

Due to the inadequate care provided by governmental authorities, neglect, abuse, and the efforts to prevent it or care for those that suffered it, was provided by a plethora of charities and philanthropic societies. The care and measures used by the various societies prior to the 1948 Childrens Act, varied greatly in quality and practise; many failed to attain the basic criteria stressed by child care professionals of the day, yet they continued to practise due to the simple fact that the only alternatives in existence were the poor-law institutions.

  

The Curtis Report 1946

 

Report of the care of children committee

 

Appointed:

 

Miss Myra Curtis CBE

*Mrs J L Adamson M.P.

*Mrs Cazalet Keir, M.P.

Mr H Graham White M.P.

Mrs Clement Brown

Mr R J Evans

Miss Lucy G. Fildes

Miss M. L. Harford

Dr Somerville Hastings

Alderman Miss K Jones, O.B.E.

The Reverend JH Litten

Mr J Moss

Mrs Helen Murtagh

Mr Henry Salt

Professor J C Spence M.C. M.D.

Mrs F. G. A. Temple and

Mr S. O Walmsley

 

To be a committee to inquire into the existing methods of providing for children who from loss of parents or from any cause whatsoever are deprived of a normal home life with their own parents or relatives; and to consider what further measures should be taken to ensure that these children are bought up under conditions best calculated to compensate them for the lack of parental care.

 

Miss Myra Curtis was chairman of the committee and Miss D.M.D Rosling of the Home Office and G T Milne were appointed joint secretaries. 

The Report was signed by

 

Herbert  Morrison

Henry Willink

R A Butler

 

*Resigned and replaced with Muriel E Nichol, and Mrs J L Adamson, M.P.  

Resigned and appointed by Aneurin Bevan

 

*The report cost £2119 13s 2d

 

Unlike most other reports that precede the relevant legislation, this one is nearly unique for the period in regards to the numbers of female participants. Obviously this is due to the widespread, then current, understanding that childcare was a remit of the woman, and was something that they would intrinsically, almost biologically know about. The biological link between mother and child, that was highlighted in the studies of the war-time evacuated children, continued to be stressed in professional circles until the 1970s.

A cruel diagnosis that emphasised the womens role in neglecting the child more than the mans, while simultaneously suggesting that there is something fundamentally, physically wrong with her if she couldnt feel, want or was unable to look after her own child    

bevan.jpg
"Nye" Bevan. Supervisor of the report. Click on photo