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
One in four family lawyers contemplates leaving the profession, Resolution reveals
A quarter of family justice professionals are on the verge of quitting the profession as the toll of lockdown on their mental health becomes clear, the family law group Resolution revealed today,...
Family Law Awards adds a Wellbeing Award - enter now
This past year has been different for everyone, but family law professionals working on the front line of family justice have faced a more challenging, stressful and demanding time than most. To...
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...
Eight things you need to know: Personal Injury damages in divorce cases
The “pre-acquired” or “non-matrimonial” argument is one which has taken up much commentary in family law circles over recent years.  However, the conundrum can be even...
Misogyny as a hate crime – what it means and why it’s needed
In recent weeks, the government announced that it will instruct all police forces across the UK to start recording crimes motivated by sex or gender on an experimental basis- effectively making...
View all articles
Authors

CARE PROCEEDINGS: Re W (Care: Scope of Investigation)

Sep 29, 2018, 17:15 PM
Slug : re-w-care-scope-of-investigation
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : May 18, 2009, 04:22 AM
Article ID : 87643

(Court of Appeal; Thorpe and Wilson LJJ and Holman J; 18 March 2009)

The mother had taken the 18-month-old child to hospital asserting that child had collapsed, but the hospital had found nothing wrong with the child, so the child had been sent home. Shortly afterwards, the child had suddenly died; medical experts had been unable to identify the cause of death. The mother was later charged with murder on the basis of her statement that she had held the child down against the pillow because she was angry that he would not stop crying, but it was subsequently established that the mother was a highly compliant young woman. Her confession was considered to be unreliable and she was found not guilty. Some years later the mother had another baby. The local authority was concerned, and monitored the mother, who had some serious mental health and alcohol problems. When the mother told the GP at the 6 week check up that the baby stopped breathing several times a day, the baby was admitted to hospital, but no breathing problems were found. The authority began care proceedings. The authority wished to instruct experts to advise on the likely causes of the first child's death, either in the light of medical developments, or in the context of child protection rather than the earlier criminal investigation, but the trial judge refused to allow any further investigation of the first child's death. The authority appealed, arguing that they should be entitled to investigate the earlier death.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, rejecting the argument that the judge's ruling was analogous to a finding of 'no case to answer'.

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