Skip to main content

Italian Mother: Statement by John Hemming

Response to statement from Judiciary:
"I welcome the transfer of the case from Chelmsford County Court to the High Court in front of the president of the family division.  The appointment of the president of the family division was a very positive step and I am certain that any applications to him will be heard justly."

"I remain concerned that many decisions taken by the family courts are taken by the magistrates court (the family proceedings court) and are then appealed to the county court.  This means that domestic proceedings can be exhausted without a case getting out of the area in which it is considered.  This means that there is never any public judgment and the case in the UK has come to an end.  All that people can then do is to take their case to Strasbourg."

Comment about failure of Essex to follow proper proceedings:
"The rules are straightforward when it comes to foreign nationals and care proceedings.  The foreign country concerned should be contacted through their central authority (in Italy's case part of the Justice Ministry).  This clearly did not happen and for this Essex County Council are clearly in the wrong."

Comment following Essex County Council's press release:
"Essex have not managed to explain why no-one in the wider extended family was competent to look after the baby when they were already looking after two of her siblings.  Additionally Essex have not explained why this baby was in their control to get adopted when the mother always intended to return to Italy."







Comments

Anonymous said…
You ask the question why this lady was detained for 6 weeks before the caesarian operation.Please see the rules regarding Mental Health Tribunals I.e when an application may be made and the time limits for when it must take place . I feel that this might have some bearing on her situation . It might be be that she was never advised of her rights to a Tribunal and representation and that in itself would fall foul of the rules.

Apart from a few journalists that I can count on one hand the majority of the media have been burying their head in the sand for too long. In 1999 I was made aware of a 17 year old pregnant young woman who had no mental health problems but who was categorically denying that she had ever been abused ( Factitious illness) by her parents. She was removed and isolated and gave birth in hospital and immediately after the birth she was taken to a Psychiatric Hospital and medicated. The baby was adopted and the young woman ( we believe still under the effects of Valium) was taken and left with a blanket at a railway station. Luckily she was looked after by railway station staff who eventually found her a permanent place to live.

Popular posts from this blog

Standards Board and Ken Livingstone

The link is to the case where Ken Livingstone appealed the decision of the Adjudication Panel for England. The Standards Board and associated Adjudication Panel have done a lot of damage to democracy in the UK. The courts are, however, bringing them into more sanity. The point about Ken Livingstone's case is that it was high profile and he also could afford to appeal. The Standard Board has a problem in that those subject to its enquiries face substantial costs that they cannot claim back. This is an issue that needs further work. In essence the Judge found that what he said brought him into disrepute, but not the office of Mayor. We do need the machinery of the SBE and APE to concentrate on things that matter rather than people being rude to each other.