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
Queer(y)ing consummation: an empirical reflection on the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Act 2013 and the role of consummation
Alexander Maine, Lecturer in Law, Leicester Law School, University of LeicesterKeywords: Consummation – adultery – marriage – empirical research – LGBTQConsummation and...
A v A (Return Without Taking Parent) [2021] EWHC 1439 (Fam)
(Family Division, MacDonald J, 18 May 2021)Abduction – Application for return order under Hague Convention 1980 - Art 13(b) defence – Whether mother’s allegations against the father...
Domestic Abuse Toolkit for Employers
The Insurance Charities have released an update to the Domestic Abuse Toolkit for Employers.Employers have a duty of care and a legal responsibility to provide a safe and effective work...
Two-week rapid consultation launched on remote, hybrid and in-person family hearings
The President of the Family Division, Sir Andrew McFarlane, has announced the launch of a two-week rapid consultation on remote, hybrid and in-person hearings in the family justice system and the...
Pension sharing orders: Finch v Baker
The Court of Appeal judgment in Finch v Baker [2021] EWCA Civ 72 was released on 28 January 2021. The judgment provides some useful guidance on not being able to get what are essentially...
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