Some interesting news items on the net over the last few days:
- Baroness Butler-Sloss wants to overhaul out-dated legislation on child abuse and neglect: We love her line of thinking, but we hope some robust guidelines will be put into place to avoid unwarranted removal of children from their parents
- A Judge spontaneously decides to physically visit a mother’s home to see if she ‘really lives there’: we hope this won’t be the norm if a more collaborative approach to family law cases comes in.
- Civil partnerships for Gay couples but not for Heterosexual ones: Oh goody, more mess for the next generation to clean up.
I applaud the district judge who decided to test the veracity of evidence given in the court. I wish they all had the same vigorous respect for ensuring truth. If they don’t have this kind of authority to take an inquisitorial approach, they should. He asked their permission, the lawyers agreed, what’s the problem? How else could he make a decision?
I see your point, but there are a couple of problems. The grandparents were not given any notice. The ‘search’ was unreasonable (the way it was carried out, the number of people present etc) and it was a partial evidence gathering exercise. There has to be a balance struck between elegance in the process and evidence gathering. We can’t have our judges, or any of our professionals, behaving like gods.
I THINK that I was vaguely referring to this last night. With HELP from a Court a Family could have its shortcomings corrected WITHOUT the NEED for ADOPTION. Why not a snap inspection into their lives. The Family could then explain their problems and the Court could HELP to RESOLVE the concerns of SS. WHY is it ALWAYS Confrontation with a view to ADOPTION. ESPECIALLY certain ethnic types.
That one was a bit special, wasn’t it? A judge playing detective, I mean. I’m mightily relieved to see that the high court deplores any judge who wants to be John Deed!
Hahaha…. I like it very much when I get to laugh on the site