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
Authors

The judicial approach to alternative families: discrimination or vive la difference?

Sep 29, 2018, 18:22 PM
Slug : Ranton-SeptFLJ2012
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Aug 28, 2012, 00:30 AM
Article ID : 99795

Duncan Ranton and Chris McIntosh

Senior Associate and Solicitor, Family Law, Russell Jones & Walker, Solicitors:

In 1977, the (then) House of Lords upheld a decision dispensing with parental consent to an adoption. The case, Re D (Parent’s Consent) [1977] 1 All ER 145, is a creature of its time, epitomising the prevailing overt judicial homophobia and the arbitrary treatment of families different to the paradigm. The trial judge dispensed with a father's consent to an adoption on account of his being a 'practising' homosexual who would not prevent his son from 'coming into contact with other men of his own proclivities'. As such, 'The father [had] nothing to offer his son at any time in the future'. The House of Lords declined to disturb that conclusion.

Skip forward 35 years. Surely the days of such an irrational judicial approach to alternative families is consigned to history? In this article, we look at that question, arriving at an ambivalent response: we've come a long way but the journey is not over. We examine two recent cases to illustrate our conclusion. We look at lessons we believe remain to be learned by those concerned with the administration of justice, if we truly are to achieve a legal framework where decisions about families are informed by reference to their individual needs, rather than preconceptions about the sexuality of those within them.

To log on to Family Law Online or to request a free trial click here

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