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
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...
Disabled women more than twice as likely to experience domestic abuse
The latest data from the Office of National Statistics shows that, in the year ending March 2020, around 1 in 7 (14.3%) disabled people aged 16 to 59 years experienced any form of domestic abuse in...
The President of the Family Division endorses Public Law Working Group report
The Courts and Tribunals Judiciary has published a message from the President of the Family Division, Sir Andrew McFarlane, in which the President endorses the publication of the President’s...
HMCTS updates online divorce services guidance
HM Courts and Tribunals Service have recently updated the online divorce services guidance with the addition of guides for deemed and dispensed service applications, alternative service...
View all articles
Authors

FAMILY PROCEEDINGS/RESIDENCE: A Local Authority v E [2007] EWHC 2396 (Fam)

Sep 29, 2018, 17:07 PM
Slug : a-local-authority-v-e-2007-ewhc-2396-fam
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Oct 19, 2007, 04:22 AM
Article ID : 86839

(Family Division; Sir Mark Potter P; 19 October 2007)

The adult daughter had been taken into care as a child, and placed in foster care; she suffered from a severe learning disability. Since her removal the parents had had a negative and uncooperative attitude towards the local authority. For some years the daughter had no contact with the parents, because the parents refused to attend supervised contact sessions; contact had now resumed. The authority sought declarations that the adult daughter lacked the capacity to decide issues of residence and contact and that it would be in her best interests to remain in her current residential care facility until she was 19 (the maximum age catered for) and thereafter to transfer to a local residential unit. The authority favoured a shared care arrangement, with generous staying contact to the parents, primarily at the weekends. However, the parents threatened that unless the daughter resided with them, they would cease contact with her altogether. The adult daughter lacked capacity to make decisions about her future, and in particular about her residence, education and community care provision, and the nature and extent of the contact she should have with her family. The court was to balance all the relevant factors relating to the situation of an incapacitated person, and to decide what solution or order was required to promote the persons best interests, and, in evaluating those interests, to conduct a welfare appraisal in accordance with the balance sheet approach espoused by the authority. Given the parents opposition to the shared care model, it was in the adult daughters best interests to have a full-time placement at the residential unit, holding open and encouraging contact with the parents. The wholly parental model of care upon which the parents insisted was not in the daughters best interests in the short or medium term, and certainly not while she was still in education.

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