Spotlight
Family Court Practice, The
Order the 2021 edition due out in May
Court of Protection Practice 2021
'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
Help separated parents ditch avoidance strategies that stop them resolving differences
The desire to avoid conflict with an ex is the primary reason that separated parents do not get to see their children.  That’s an eye-opening finding from a survey of 1,105 separated...
What is a Cohabitation Agreement, and do I need one?
Many couples, despite living together, never seek to legally formalise their living and financial arrangements.  They mistakenly believe that the concept of a ‘common law’ husband and...
Welsh Government launches consultation on amendments to adoption regulations
The Welsh Government has launched a consultation on the proposed amendments to the Adoption Agencies (Wales) Regulations 2005 and the Care Planning, Placement and Case Review (Wales) Regulations 2015....
JM v RM [2021] EWHC 315 (Fam)
(Family Division, Mostyn J, 22 February 2021)Abduction – Wrongful retention – Hague Convention application – Mother decided not to return to Australia with children – COVID 19...
Re A (A Child) (Hague Convention 1980: Set Aside) [2021] EWCA Civ 194
(Court of Appeal (Civil Division), Moylan, Asplin LJJ, Hayden J, 23 February 2021)Abduction – Hague Convention 1980 – Return order made – Mother successfully applied to set aside due...
View all articles
Authors

Adoption in practice: dogma and disarray?

Sep 29, 2018, 18:35 PM
Slug : Jones-JanFLJ2013
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : 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