Spotlight
Court of Protection Practice 2024
'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 articlesrss feeds
A seismic change in ethos and practice
Caroline Bowden, a member of the Private Family Law Early Resolution Working Group which first examined what changes were needed, looks at the effect of the revised rules on everyone working in family...
Debunking the myth about sensitivity in drug and alcohol testing
*** SPONSORED CONTENT***With all the news about deep fakes, authentication and transparency in the news at the moment, Cansford Laboratories Reporting Scientist Jayne Hazon has examined a recent...
New Family Presiding Judges Appointed
The Lady Chief Justice, with the concurrence of the Lord Chancellor, has announced the appointment of two Family Presiding Judges.Mr Justice MacDonald has been appointed for a period of four years,...
Victims given greater access to justice through legal aid reform
Innocent people who have suffered miscarriages of justice, personal harm or injury are among those who will benefit from upcoming changes to legal aid means testing coming into effect this...
Obligations and responsibilities – the mosquito in the bedroom
Stephen Wildblood KC, 3PB BarristersLuke Nelson, 3PB BarristersWhatever happened to ‘obligations and responsibilities’ in s 25(2) MCA 1973?  Why is it that all of the other words in...
View all articles
Authors

Adoption in practice: dogma and disarray?

Sep 29, 2018, 18:35 PM
Title : Adoption in practice: dogma and disarray?
Slug : Jones-JanFLJ2013
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Check Copyright Text : No
Date : Dec 28, 2012, 00:30 AM
Article ID : 101223

Edward Lloyd-Jones

Barrister, 14 Gray's Inn Square:

The government wishes to increase the number of children adopted from care and, in pursuit of this  outcome , to speed up the progress of care proceedings through the courts. More children, it is said, 'deserve permanency'. But are enough prospective adopters available and is sufficient support in place, particularly in relation to older children with challenging behaviour or special needs?

Are there dangers that in pursuing a dash for adoption we neglect to take sufficient account of each child's particular needs and existing relationships, including with siblings?

The government's legislative proposals include reducing the scope of public law proceedings in relation to their length, use of experts and consideration of care plans. The 'modernisation' of  court structures and procedure will place greater emphasis on 'compliance' with process and the use of a central corpus of 'good practice' materials. Is such reductionism compatible with the objective of providing the most suitable outcome for children, often with complex backgrounds and needs?

Everyone wishes to avoid delay in determining the right future for children in care proceedings but if we are serious about doing so we must also address the external  contribution of institutions such as Cafcass and The Legal Services Commission.

The full version of this article appears in the January 2013 issue of Family Law.

 

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