Latest articles
UK Immigration Rough Sleeper Rule
Aaron Gates-Lincoln, Immigration NewsThe UK government has recently introduced a controversial new set of rules that aim to make rough sleeping grounds for refusal or cancellation of a migrant’s...
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...
View all articles
Authors

What’s wrong with linear judgments? (£)

Sep 29, 2018, 22:04 PM
family law, linear judgments, social work evidence, care plans
In a series of cases over the last 12 months, starting with the judgment of McFarlane LJ in Re G (Care Proceedings: Welfare Evaluation) [2013] EWCA Civ 965, [2014] 1 FLR 670 judges have condemned social work evidence and lower court decisions in care proceedings because they were based on ‘linear judgements’.
Slug : what-s-wrong-with-linear-judgments-07b26d8e-7fb2-44a3-b455-d78fcfd34cc9
Meta Title : What’s wrong with linear judgments?
Meta Keywords : family law, linear judgments, social work evidence, care plans
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Sep 3, 2014, 03:24 AM
Article ID : 106903
Family Law

JUDITH MASSON, Professor of Socio-legal Studies, Bristol University

In a series of cases over the last 12 months, starting with the judgment of McFarlane LJ in Re G (Care Proceedings: Welfare Evaluation) [2013] EWCA Civ 965, [2014] 1 FLR 670 judges have condemned social work evidence and lower court decisions in care proceedings because they were based on ‘linear judgements’.

This paper questions the basis of the criticism by examining how the term ‘linear judgment’ is used in the courts, the potential defects of such judgments and how else the term may be understood. It makes the case for acknowledging a hierarchy of care plans, consistent with obligations under the European Convention of Human Rights, Art 8 and the requirements on local authorities in Children Act 1989, s 22C.

In considering what options are ‘realistic’, courts should be more aware of research evidence, particularly on the difficulties of successful re-unification of children with their parents. Assessments, and evidence of social work witnesses, should include analysis which provides a clear chain of reasoning linking the child’s needs and carers’ capacity to meet these with the proposed plan, order or placement. So far as possible, this should be written in a way that service users can understand. The requirements for timely decision-making should also apply to appeals.

The full version of this article appears in the September 2014 issue of Family Law.

Online subscribers can access the full article here.

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