Skip to main content

Do parents have rights in the family court

The link is to a recent judgment in which para 10 says:
I think it important to remember when one is looking either at the independent assessments by social workers or at applications under section 38(6) of the Act that one needs to be child focused. It is not a question of the mother's right to have a further assessment, it is: would the assessment assist the judge in reaching a conclusion or the right conclusion in relation to the child in question? And on this particular issue it does seem to me that the judge was exercising a discretion and doing so appropriately on all the facts available to him. He thus reached a conclusion which I cannot for myself say in any way is plainly wrong, and since he has based himself on the latest authority on the point and considered the matter carefully, I, speaking for myself, cannot say either that he has erred in law and would dismiss the appeal in relation to a further social worker assessment.

This is a decision of the court of appeal which says that the mother has no right to a further independent assessment. This particular mother has only had assessments done by the local authority or its employees since she gave birth to her 10th child. The court of appeal says that she has no right to an independent assessment.

It is Catch 22.

Comments

Jerry said…
This case is one I site in cases, although slightly differnt aspects of the case to the one above it shows the Judges don't practice what they preach.
Re. GW and Ors v Oldham MBC and Ors [2005] EWCA Civ 1247
All though this case revolves around NAHI it is further emphasis for second opinions Consideration, on appeal allowed by consent, of court's reliance on single expert in care proceedings. “The purpose of this judgment, therefore, was to consider: (1) the advisability of the court relying on a single expert in care proceedings, when the issue that expert has to address is of central importance to the judge's findings; and (2) the propriety of permitting parents who deny abusing their child a second opinion”.
LJ Thorpe quoted “This judgment was not to be seen as an encouragement to a disappointed party to challenge pre-final hearing case management decisions; however, such decisions could, as in this case, throw up points of fundamental importance and, in such circumstances",

"a party should not hesitate to seek permission to appeal”.

The court also drew attention to the importance of timetabling in care cases, in particular the Protocol for Judicial Case Management in Public Law Children Act Cases [2003] 2 FLR 719. Further, it commented on the position of the local authority and the guardian respectively: the former is faced with a difficult position in contested care proceedings involving NAHI, requiring a delicate balance between the need to make out a case and the duty to place all relevant information before the court; and the latter has a proactive role to play in ensuring that a case is ready for hearing, and that all the appropriate evidence has been assembled; accordingly, if a guardian takes the view that a second opinion sought by parents is properly necessary to achieve justice, he or she should not hesitate to say so.
Jerry said…
And another one

Re. B (A Child) [2007] EWCA Civ 556
The case was from appeal which was allowed in relation to directions made in care proceedings preventing parents from instructing an expert.
Lord Justice Thorpe stated that proceedings where the potentially permanent loss of a child is at stake must be seen to be fair.

“It is very important that parents who are at risk of losing a child forever should have the confidence in the fairness of the proceedings and that inevitably means the even handed nature of the proceedings”.

I use a further 6 case laws in appeals, all saying the same thing. makes no sense John as to why theses Judges don't seem to remeber their previous court rulings and judgments, maybe J Haines should have looked for cases by the same Judges who heard the RJ appeal,it might not have helped with this appeal but it might next time round.
moira said…
My friend was a top family lawyer in his field who worked for families and the local authority.A decent man who always did the best he could for clients

He said he wouldnt choose law again if he had his time again as the courts and justice system are appallingly corrupt.Says it all.

Popular posts from this blog

Statement re false allegations from Esther Baker

Statement by John Hemming
I am pleased that the Police have now made it clear that there has been a concerted effort to promote false criminal allegations against me and that the allegations had no substance whatsoever.
I would like to thank Emily Cox, my children, Ayaz Iqbal (my Solicitor), my local lib dem team and many others who supported me through this dreadful experience. There are many worse things that happen to people, but this was a really bad experience.
It is bad enough to have false allegations made about yourself to the police, but to have a concerted campaign involving your political opponents and many others in public creates an environment in which it is reasonable to be concerned about ill founded vigilante attacks on your family and yourself. Luckily there was a more substantial lobby to the contrary as well, which included many people who were themselves real survivors of abuse, which has helped.
I am normally someone who helps other people fight injustice. …

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…

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…