Latest articles
Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust v DV (A Child) [2021] EWHC 1037 (Fam)
(Family Division, Cohen J, 19 April 2021)Medical Treatment – 17-year-old had form of bone cancer and required surgery For comprehensive, judicially approved coverage of every important...
Domestic Abuse Bill
Aaron Gates-Lincoln, Immigration NewsAfter years of development the Domestic Abuse Bill returned to the House of Lords in the UK on the 8th March 2021 to complete its report stage, one of the final...
Coercive control and children’s welfare in Re H-N and Others
When families come to strife, arrangements must be made for the future care of any children. In some circumstances, this means an application to the courts. These ‘private law orders’ can...
Profession: Expert Witness
The value of a family business or business interest is treated as an asset and therefore part of the matrimonial pot to be distributed when it comes to negotiating a financial settlement on divorce or...
How does a jointly held property pass on death?
When meeting with clients to discuss their succession planning, many cannot recall whether their property is held jointly as joint tenants or jointly as tenants in common. The distinction is that with...
View all articles

Prisoner wins right to father child by artificial insemination

Sep 29, 2018, 17:25 PM
Slug : 05-12-2007-prisoner-wins-right-to-father-child-by-artificial-insemination
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Dec 5, 2007, 11:41 AM
Article ID : 90029

Yesterday the European Court of Human Rights ruled that Britain had violated the right to respect for private and family life of a murderer and his wife by refusing them access to artificial insemination facilities whilst in prison.

Kirk Dickson was convicted of murder and sentenced to life imprisonment in 1994. He met his now wife, Lorraine, in 1999 through a prison pen pal network while she was also in prison.

The couple requested access to artificial insemination facilities to enable them to have a child together, arguing that it was their only opportunity to have a child together because Mrs Dickson would be too old to have a child when her husband could be released. When they were refused access in 2001 they commenced legal action.

In April 2006 the European Court of Human Rights rejected their appeal against the then Home Secretary, David Blunkett. However the court's Grand Chamber overturned that ruling, voting 12 to 5 in favour of allowing the couple access to IVF treatment and awarded them €5,000 in damages and €21,000 in costs.

Categories :
  • News
Tags :
Provider :
Product Bucket :
Recommend These Products
Related Articles
Load more comments
Comment by from