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
Stranded spouses: an overview
Mani Singh Basi, Barrister, 4PB, author of A Practical Guide to Stranded Spouses in Family Law ProceedingsThis article provides an overview of the issues that often arise in cases...
Pension apportionment: resisting the straight-line orthodoxy
Fiona Hay, 2 Harcourt BuildingsDavid Lockett, Senior Actuary, Actuaries for Lawyers LtdPension Apportionment – resisting the Straight-Line Orthodoxy. In non-needs cases it is often critical to...
Now is the time to reassess presumption of parental involvement in cases involving domestic abuse
Lea Levine, Paralegal at Stewarts and former independent domestic violence advisorIn this article, paralegal and former independent domestic violence advisor (“IDVA”) Lea Levine...
Equality roulette: assessing the legality of the Department of Education’s guidance on gender questioning students in schools (Part 2)
Dr Bianca Jackson, Family law barrister, Coram ChambersThis is Part 2 of a three-part article exploring the possible legal difficulties for schools and colleges that adopt the Department for...
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...
View all articles
Authors

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

Sep 29, 2018, 18:22 PM
Title : The judicial approach to alternative families: discrimination or vive la difference?
Slug : Ranton-SeptFLJ2012
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Check Copyright Text : 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