Van Slooten v the Netherlands · No. 45644/18
European Court of Human Rights · 15 April 2025 · Article 8
Ms van Slooten’s young child entered foster care in October 2015. Four months later, the care providers told her that they saw the child’s future elsewhere. She disputed their assessment and proposed a different way to test her parenting abilities. The question in Strasbourg was how the authorities had reached such a lasting decision so quickly.
How she lost parental authority
In June 2017 the Overijssel Regional Court ended her parental authority. It considered the time in which her child could reasonably wait for reunification had expired. The Arnhem-Leeuwarden Court of Appeal upheld that decision. Her unwillingness to move to a particular assessment clinic had weighed heavily against her.
What the Dutch courts needed to examine
Strasbourg accepted that the mother had sometimes hindered the assessment. The file nevertheless showed she was open to alternatives. The domestic authorities gave up on reunification early without properly assessing her parenting capacity or explaining why reunification would harm this particular child. That decision-making process violated the right to family life.
The payment and the next step for the family
The government confirmed it had paid the €20,000 award for distress. Its January 2026 action plan also recorded a fresh examination of the family’s situation. The guardian intended to seek an independent representative for the child and discuss contact with the mother. At that reporting date the child was still living with the foster family. The judgment itself did not restore parental authority.
Judgment and sources
Read the Strasbourg judgment in HUDOC
Dutch government action plan, paragraphs 6–16, on payment, contact and reassessment
Dutch Parliament record of the action plan
More Strasbourg cases · Netherlands national journal · Individual consultations
