John Hemming's Web Log

This story in The Telegraph is a step beyond the normal abuses in the family courts (and court of protection). This was a pregnant mother visiting the UK for a training course lasting only two weeks. It ends up with her baby being taken through a forcible caesarean and then placed for adoption for the usual spurious reasons that are used. Oddly enough last night I had another case of someone who was a foreign mother having her children taken for the system whilst she is deported. This is much like the case from which I highlighted a JR decision earlier this year. Mum was deported and the child kept. The Italian case is one about which more will be heard. Also the one raised with me last night. The USA case is one which has had some attention. In essence families count for nothing in the modern family court. The "best interests of the child" are "paramount" which means that what the social workers say goes. If a social worker does not say what the manage...

The case of Mark and Kerry McDougall who went to Ireland because she was considered not to have the capacity to marry or look after children is an important case. They have lived with two children in Ireland, but have now returned to Fife. The authorities have suddenly decided to take an interest without any good reason. This raises serious concerns about the way in which assessments are done in the UK.

Lets look at the story today: The children's services department at Birmingham City Council could be taken over by the Department for Education (DfE), the BBC has learned. and that of October More than a fifth of frontline social worker posts are unfilled in Birmingham, it has been revealed. A manager in Birmingham told me that he knew of experienced people who could be employed as social workers in Birmingham, but the government would not allow them because they did not have the right piece of paperwork. We should not be surprised of the existence of problems if only 80% of the staff are in place. Temporary agency staff are not the solution.

This case is an interesting one just reported by the Court of Appeal. The first question that should be asked is why it took the English judicial system over a year to decide it did not have jurisdiction. The second question is why the English Courts have decided there is an issue when the Swedish Courts have not. They cannot both be right. It is my view that the evidence in the family courts in England is frequently intellectually unreliable and as a consequence the decisions are not well grounded in reality. This case seems to substantiate my view and give good reasons why the system in England takes the wrong children into care.

I noted that the current council proposals are now much like my proposals of 2003. I voted against Metro in 1992. I thought that we should stick to heavy rail and bus/trolley bus. The image is my proposal from 2003 for Birmingham which is pretty well the current council proposal. I have a personal minority view historically otherwise I would have prioritised buses in the city centre rather than metro. However, c'est la vie.

To me the thing that is clear is that the council does not seem to care about the impact on Omar of their legal threats. I am trying to get the council to respond sensibly, but they don't seem able to.

This is not, however, the end of the process to get Stechford Railway Station's access issues resolved. It is, however, an important first step.

This is not, however, the end of the process to get Stechford Railway Station's access issues resolved. It is, however, an important first step.

Appealing this case would be now moot. However, there are some points to be made. Firstly, it is in my view a responsibility of parents who separate to make reasonable efforts to ensure that a good relationship is maintained between both parents and children. There are circumstances under which this is obviously not reasonable (when one of the parents is a real threat to the children). However, this is clearly a responsibility. However, the objective of maintaining contact between parent and child does not permit the court to behave unlawfully. There are a number of problems with this case. The first is that the court should not ordinarily hear a contempt hearing of its own motion. The second hearing (and the third) should have been held by a different judge to the one who heard it. The second is that legal assistance should have been made available before the grandparents and aunt were locked up on bail. It raises a question really as to whether effectively a form of collec...

For me the particularly interesting aspect of the secret imprisonment of 11th October is that it appears that the judge imprisoned the mother because the judge did not believe what she said. Now that means that the judge is actually prosecuting the mother for perjury as well as sitting in judgment. The mother said her children were somewhere, but they were not. The point about this is that there are lots of legal precedents that the judge should not sit in judgment on this case and hence it could be challenged on appeal. How does one do that when one knows neither the name of the mother of her solicitors.

This story in the Sunday Times looks at the evidence that the numbers of deaths from child abuse and neglect are not going down and possibly going up. That is at a time when more children are taken into care. It is important to remember that taking a child into care is supposed to be a measure to prevent significant harm. Hence if the numbers taken into care are going up, but it is having no effect on the most significant harm of death then a question should be asked as to whether the right things are being done. There always will be a financial need to limit the number of children taken into care. When Haringey were considering whether or not to take Peter Connolly into care they were under severe pressures. The fact is that there were children in care at the time in Haringey who were taken into care because their mother might say things to them that might undermine their self esteem. If those children were not in care there would have been space for Peter Connolly. It isn...

This is a story that resulted from a hearing in Court 45 at the RCJ (Royal Courts of Justice) yesterday. These are the sorts of imprisonments that have tended not to be revealed by the system, but are now more likely to be revealed. There was, in fact, one similar to this which was revealed earlier this year. However, it does appear that the judges are now starting to follow the rules which has to be positive. As to the underlying case it depends in part on how frail the pensioners are as to whether this is or is not an appropriate action to take. I was contacted recently by someone representing a group of people who have left the country to get away from the biased procedures (Lashin v Russia) that operate in England and Wales. I hope to see this reported in some way (even if it is only on my web log) in the future. I am not sure myself whether this will produce the result that the system is trying to get. However, it is only when there is a pattern of such cases that it beco...

What we know (and was reported by PA) is that at a hearing which started at 9.30am in Court 35 in the RCJ Theis J committed a woman to jail. On 2nd August Sir James Munby the President of the Family Division sent out a circular which clarified the practice directions of May and June. The circular is Here in a PDF form, but this is what it said. From: President of FD  Sent: 02 August 2013 11:02  To: ZZ RCJ Family High Court Judges; ZZ DFJs; ZZHMCTS Justices Clerks; Arbuthnot,  District Judge  Subject: PRESIDENT'S CIRCULAR - COMMITTALS  Dear All,  You will recall the Guidance on Committals issued by the LCJ and me on 3 May 2013 and the  supplemental Guidance I issued on 4 June 2013. In relation to the latter may I remind you of  paragraph 5.  A question has arisen as to whether paragraph 6 of the original Guidance applies in all  committal cases or only in cases to which paragraphs 4 and 5 apply.  Paragraph 6 applie...

This is a judgment about a case that I know nothing more than what is in the published judgment. It is interesting in that the Slovaks have asked for some Slovak Children who are citizens of Slovakia to be sent to Slovakia, but the court has refused.

There was a protest today where students came as part of a "day of action" about student finance. The first point I would make is that although this occupation was better behaved than the previous occupation it still disrupted the business of my office. The business of my office involves solving problems for constituents. Hence it is not fair to my constituents. There are limits to protest. Violent protests are not acceptable. The occupation was generally well behaved, but there was an attempt to push past me into my office. (I was holding the door shut) That actually is the use of violence even though I have told the police that I do not wish to take this further. The issue they were raising about the certainty of the arrangement of finance is a very important principle. It is important that when students commit to a financial arrangement that this is stuck to by government. It is governed by a number of statutory instruments. One if SI 2012/1309 The Education (S...

This is a link to a petition from a translator working in the family courts. It states: The Petition of an interpreter working in England, Declares that the interpreter works in family court proceedings translating for families who speak Czech and Slovak. She has been shocked at the way in which a judge was partial in proceedings and the evidence that was accepted which would never be accepted anywhere else in courts. There was a social worker who was interrogated by both sides who was asked whether the grandmother behaved appropriately with her daughter in the contact centre and the social worker said “yes she did”. The next question was whether she would behave appropriately in her own house. The social worker said that she could not say that she would and hence the court decided not to place the child with the grandmother. Furthermore the grandparents were criticised for approaching the media in England. In a second case the family had signed documentation that they did not un...

The Family I have interviewed below are one of many families to have left the UK to avoid the forced adoption industry. What is unusual about this particular family is that a Belgian family have offered to look after them as refugees because the Belgians are opposed to the way in which the English system works. I have interviewed both the mother and father and the mother and father with whom they are staying.