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

When separating twins for adoption is in their best interests

Jan 9, 2019, 08:08 AM
Slug :
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : Yes
Prioritise In Trending Articles : Yes
Date : Jan 9, 2019, 08:00 AM
Article ID :

David Bedingfield, barrister at 4 Paper Buildings, discusses how the court came to decide that it was in the best interests of twins to be separated for adoption, following ‘incompetence and serial failings’ by the local authority.

Prospective Adopters for BT and another v County of Herefordshire District Council and others (A Local Authority and others intervening) [2018] EWFC 76

What are the practical implications of this case?
 

This case affirms that judges in care proceedings must determine the best interests of a child at the time of the hearing—the child’s current reality is the starting point. There is no assumption that the child’s birth family is the appropriate placement or in the best interests of the child. There is no ‘right’ that trumps the command in the Children Act 1989 and the Adoption and Children Act 2002 that the welfare of the child is the court’s paramount consideration.

This case also confirms that local authority care plans must set out, with particularity, what will occur in the future. Those care plans must be included in the bundle of documents that will be considered later by social workers, review panels and independent reviewing officers (IRO). The plans may only be changed after a full review by social workers and the IRO. It is likely that expert assessment is required if siblings are to be separated or if children are to be removed from long-term placements against the wishes of the carers.
 

Local authorities must be transparent with regard to all decisions made affecting children in their care and meetings must be minuted. Systems should be set up to ensure there are regular reviews of care plans for children in care. Those care plans must be followed, unless the welfare of the child requires they be changed. If they are changed, reasons must be clearly set out and supported.

Want to access the rest of this story? To read the balance of this article click here (subscription required). This news analysis was first published by LexisPSL Family. To request a free one week trial click here.

 
Categories :
  • Articles
  • News
Tags :
child_mother_hands
Authors
Provider :
Product Bucket : Family Law (General)
Related Articles
Load more comments
Comment by from