Spotlight
Family Law Awards 2020
Shortlist announced - time to place your vote!
Court of Protection Practice 2020
'Court of Protection Practice goes from strength to strength, having...
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance Tenth Edition
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance is an authoritative specialist text...
Spotlight
Latest articles
No fault divorce - the end of the blame game
The Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Act 2020, which passed into law on 25 June 2020, will introduce "no fault" divorce in England and Wales for the first time. This article looks at what it...
New Cafcass guidance on working with children during COVID-19
The Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service (Cafcass) has published guidance on working with children during the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. The guidance sets out arrangements for...
Remote hearings in family proceedings – how is justice perceived?
The motion for the recent Kingsley Napley debate:  “This House believes remote hearings are not remotely fair” was carried with a fairly balanced 56% in favour and 44% against....
Online event: An update on recovery in the civil, family courts & tribunals
HM Courts and Tribunals Service has announced that it is holding an online event to discuss its recovery plan for the civil, family courts and tribunals, which was published on 9 November 2020...
HM Courts & Tribunals Service confirms 2020 Christmas and new year closure dates
HM Courts & Tribunals Service (HMCTS) has confirmed the dates over the Christmas and new year period in which Crown Courts, magistrates’ courts,...
View all articles
Authors

Re N (A Child: Religion: Jehovah's Witness) [2011] EWHC 3737 (Fam)

Sep 29, 2018, 21:29 PM
Slug : 2011EWHC3737Fam
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Feb 21, 2012, 08:39 AM
Article ID : 97893

(Family Division; HHJ Bellamy, sitting as a judge of the High Court; 24 August 2011)

The parents of a 4-year-old boy separated. The mother was a Jehovah’s Witness, the father Anglican and in the armed forces. The father sought to restrict the mother’s influence on the child regarding her religion which involved taking him to meetings and house to house evangelism and restricting his participation in activities which she considered inconsistent with her faith such as attending birthday parties, celebrating Christmas and visiting other places of worship. She had withdrawn the child from a nativity play when she found out he had a part without consulting the father.

A shared residence order was agreed in principle and the judge ordered a broadly equal sharing of time which would help guard against the risk of one party’s religion predominating. Neither parent has a predominant right to choose a child's religious upbringing and restrictions can be imposed where that is necessary for the welfare of the child. Restrictions were placed on both parents teaching the child their beliefs and involving the child in certain elements of religious practice, however both should continue to take him to their respective places of worship. It was important the child did not feel under pressure or conflicted. The child was not to be denied participation in standard school activities. Arrangements were put in place in relation to giving consent to any medical treatment of the child using blood products should it be necessary, since the mother felt unable to give her consent tor such treatment. A family assistance order was made for 6 months.

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