Spotlight
Family Law Awards 2020
Shortlist announced - time to place your vote!
Court of Protection Practice 2020
'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
Resolution issues Brexit notes for family lawyers ahead of IP completion day
Family lawyer organisation, Resolution, has issued two joint notes to assist family lawyers in England and Wales ahead of the end of the Brexit transition/implementation period at 11 pm on 31 December...
Online filing is real-time on New Year's Eve: practice direction change to accommodate EU withdrawal arrangements
I have heard that there will be an amendment to the relevant practice directions to provide that online applications received on New Year’s Eve after 4:30 PM and before 11:00 PM will count as...
Northamptonshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust v AB
The issue in this case concerned AB’s capacity to make specific decisions about treatment relating to her anorexia nervosa. She was 28 years old and had suffered with anorexia since the age of...
EU laws continue until at least 2038 and beyond
The UK left the EU on 31 January 2020.  But in matters of law it fully leaves on 31 December 2020.  But EU laws will continue to apply, and be applied, in the English family courts from 1...
Remote hearings in family proceedings – how is justice perceived?
The motion for the recent Kingsley Napley debate:  “This House believes remote hearings are not remotely fair” was carried with a fairly balanced 56% in favour and 44% against....
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