Skip to main content

Court of Appeal decision on adoption proceedings

The link is to a decision of the Court of Appeal where parents apply to stop an adoption because their circumstances have changed. In essence it makes the point that first the court has to decide whether or not the circumstances have changed. At that point no decision should be taken as to the welfare of the child.

Once the decision as to circumstances has been made then welfare should be considered.

All of this ignores the overwhelming tendency of a number of family court judges to prefer intervention and adoption.

It is important to note what has happened now with the Websters. In the Webster (Hardingham) case it has now been decided that they didn't cause the original harm.

In the mean time two sets of adoptive families have been told that the children now with them should not have been removed from the original family. That is not in any way unique. PC&S is a case that went to the European Court and the same conclusion was come to, but by then it was too late. I know of another case exactly the same.

We must remember that the rush to judgment and rush to adoption harms the child, the extended birth family and the adoptive family (families).

What it also does is to undermine other adoptions which are without question valid.

I have drafted an application to court to allow me to publish the anonymised judgments to enable this debate to be properly held.

This story looks further at the issue

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Millionaires and politics

The Labour Party spent most of the last election criticising me for being a successful businessman (aka millionaire). That is business in the private sector employing over 250 people. It is worth looking at the situation for the Labour Candidate now:

For the year 2016-7 Annual Income from Parliament74,962Specifically for her book51,250Other media income etc5,322.82Total declared income131,534.82

Traditionally anyone with an annual income of over £100,000 has been considered to be a millionaire. I did not use my position in parliament to increase my income.


I have been asked for sources for this. This BBC piece looks at how one should define rich. It was written in 2011 so the figures will be slightly out of date. There are perhaps 2 relevant pieces:
"In 1880 a rich person would have had £100,000 in assets or an income of £10,000 a year, he says. About a hundred people a year died leaving £100,000 and by 1910 this was 250 - "a microscopic fraction of the number of death…

Homelessness vs Selling Books

Candidates in elections tend to find themselves very busy with lots of things to do.  It is, therefore, necessary to prioritise things to ensure that the important things are dealt with.

To me the issue of homelessness and rough sleeping is an important issue.  Therefore, when Birmingham's Faith Leaders group contacted me to ask me what I would propose and whether I would work with them to make things better I was pleased to respond with my views and indicate that I would work with them after the election.

The Faith Leaders Group (Bishops and other religious leaders in Birmingham) have now sent out their report.

Sadly, according to their report,  I was the only candidate for Yardley to respond.  The group in their report said:

"Particularly disappointing was the lack of response from some of those candidates seeking re-election as MP for their respective constituencies."
It is worth looking at the priorities of my opponent.
Interestingly today she has decided to be at th…

Gender Issues comparison of candidates

John Hemming believes that an MP should represent everyone in their constituency.  This should be regardless of their race, religion, gender, abledness, sexual orientation or anything else.  It should be everyone.

When he was an MP he worked on issues relating to men, those relating to women and those relating to non-binary people. Everyone.

For example here is John Hemming on a demonstration outside the courts with the campaign group Women Against Rape (it related to the case of a mother who had her child removed from her because the mother was raped).




Jess Phillips, who campaigns on women's issues, notwithstanding the questions asked about her appointments in her parliamentary office, had the following response when asked for a debate on issues specifically relating to men: