Publication of the Local Child Safeguarding Practice Review Report into the murder of Finley Boden

The death of Finley was a tragedy, and our thoughts are with those who knew him and loved him. We are profoundly sorry that together we were unable to prevent his death. 

The publication today of the Local Child Safeguarding Practice Review report provides an opportunity for all the agencies involved in Finley’s short life, to learn and to reflect on their complex and important work with vulnerable children and families. Further, it requires that responsibility for learning is deeply considered, implemented, monitored, and evaluated. Cafcass accepts the recommendations of the review in full and has been implementing the necessary changes and improvements since Finley’s death.  

When it was decided in October 2020 that Finley should live with and be in the care of his parents, everyone involved – including his guardian – believed his parents had made and sustained the changes necessary to care for him safely. What led to his death was the ability of Finley’s parents to deceive everyone involved, about their love for him and their desire to care for him. No one could have predicted from what was known at the time that they were capable of such cruelty or that there was a risk that they would intentionally hurt him, let alone murder him.  

As a direct result of Finley’s murder, Cafcass has strengthened the management support and supervision policy for family court advisers and children’s guardian’s, requiring professional reflection and challenge with the oversight of a manager whenever a local authority is proposing a return or reunification of a child to parents or carers where there has been known or alleged, abuse and/or neglect.   

Today’s report addresses the court decision that was made for there to be an eight-week transition period during which Finley would gradually be returned to the care of his parents. It was agreed that during this time, there would be continued oversight by the court, regular social work visits and support from the local authority. His guardian was concerned that the proposed arrangements were untested and took the view that the move for Finley to his parents should happen whilst the case was still in proceedings, so that if it became clear this was not in his best interest, a swift decision could be made by the court to afford him continuity with the carers he lived with at the time – with his grandparents.  

On the basis of what was known at the time and during the proceedings, including the efforts of his parents to persuade everyone involved that they loved Finley and had made changes so they could care for him, it is not possible to say whether a longer transition plan would have prevented his death. The report of the local Child Safeguarding Practice Review does not hold anyone but Finley’s parents responsible for his murder.  

The learning for all agencies that is set out in the report is clear, including the restrictions and unfamiliar arrangements associated with the Covid pandemic. We will honour Finley through our continued challenge to areas of our work that need to further improve, explaining to practitioners and managers why guidance has changed and taking action if the intended improvements are not making the required progress consistently.