• About
    • Privacy Policy
  • GSW
  • Guide To Making A Subject Access Request
  • In Dad’s Shoes
    • An Overview
    • Invitation
    • Media
    • Photos
    • Press Release
    • Soft Launch
    • Speeches
    • Summary
  • Media Coverage
  • Parliamentary Debates
  • Voice of the Child Podcasts

Researching Reform

Researching Reform

Daily Archives: September 9, 2013

The Children and Families Bill

09 Monday Sep 2013

Posted by Natasha in Update

≈ Leave a comment

As the House of Lords, and the rest of Westminster, creaks back to life, today sees the Committee Stage of the Bill in the Lords take place. 

A quick recap on the aims of the Bill, is added below…

The Bill seeks to reform legislation relating to the following areas:

  • adoption and children in care
  • aspects of the family justice system
  • children and young people with special educational needs
  • the Office of the Children’s Commissioner for England
  • statutory rights to leave and pay for parents and adopters
  • time off work for ante-natal care
  • the right to request flexible working

And on 9th October, there is to be a line by line examination of the Bill. We’ll keep you updated.

portcullis3

Share this:

  • Tweet
  • WhatsApp
  • Email
  • Telegram
  • Pocket
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Print

Like this:

Like Loading...

Supreme Court To hand Down Judgement in Re A, Today

09 Monday Sep 2013

Posted by Natasha in Children, Family Law

≈ 1 Comment

This case focuses on whether the wardship jurisdiction (or inherent jurisdiction) of the Family Division of the High Court can ever be exercised in respect of a child who has never been physically present in England and Wales.

The Supreme Court is expected to give its judgement at 2.30pm today. Presiding over the case will be Lady Hale of Richmond, Lord Wilson, Lord Reed, Lord Hughes of Ombersley and Lord Toulson.

You can read the facts of the case here, and watch the judgement live from the Supreme Court website, here. The judgement will be uploaded onto the Supreme Court’s YouTube channel, too. Yah, they have a You Tube channel!

UPDATE: The Supreme Court allowed the mother’s appeal. Watch this space.

Share this:

  • Tweet
  • WhatsApp
  • Email
  • Telegram
  • Pocket
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Print

Like this:

Like Loading...

Judge Stands Between Spouses – And Falls

09 Monday Sep 2013

Posted by Natasha in Family Law

≈ 15 Comments

This news story got our attention this morning, because it is extraordinary.

A judge has decided to delay a couple’s request for a restraining order to be lifted so that they can rekindle their marriage, which suffered as a result of the husband’s violence towards his wife.

Judge Jamie Tabor QC, who has since cut short the 7 year restraining order which was granted in 2010 (and which the couple now need only serve a further 6 months), has decided that if the couple can get along over the phone for the remaining period before having any physical contact, he will allow them to reapply to have the order lifted.

The decision will cause some to bristle in the more Libertarian camps across the country: should a judge ever have the right to stand between two consenting adults, regardless of what has gone before? Mr Nash received  a two-year supervision order, a restraining order for seven years, and ordered to do 100 hours of unpaid work, as a result of violent behaviour towards Mrs Nash. He has since complied with all orders. Mrs Nash, we are told, initially contacted her husband to see if the Order could be lifted, as she missed him and wanted him home. Both she and Mr Nash were lonely without each other, and wanted to reconnect. Judge Tabor’s concessions then, may appease the more relaxed Libertarians amongst us: he has effectively reduced a huge chunk of time to run on the Restraining Order and will allow the couple to reapply to have the order lifted once the 6 months remaining have run their course.

The decision has been welcomed by domestic violence charities too, as one which is insightful and on the button. A decision which whilst somewhat intrusive, is designed to balance out protecting the vulnerable party, Mrs Nash, whilst trying at worst, not to prevent a reconciliation of marriage, and at best, to encourage a fruitful attempt. By delaying a fully fledged rekindling of their marriage, the judge hopes to tread a cautious line between personal freedoms and protection of the vulnerable.

But are the Libertarians and the charities right?

At Researching Reform, we can’t help but think the answer is no. The crucial issue here doesn’t lie in whether or not Mr Nash will be able to speak politely over the telephone for the next 6 months. Anyone who has worked in the field of domestic violence will know that perpetrators of this kind of behaviour can be keenly charming over the telephone, and that this kind of ‘test’ will have no bearing at all on how Mr Nash will behave in person, towards Mrs Nash.

Mr Nash’s probation officers are also clearly concerned: Mr Nash, they say, still seems to have no understanding of the severity of his actions, and is not ‘really committed to changing”. Mrs Nash too, is in a bad way. When asked by Judge Tabor whether she would know what to do if Mr Nash hit her again, she said that she did not know.

So, in 6 months’ time, if phone contact goes well, Mr Nash and Mrs Nash may recommence their relationship under one roof. But what will Mrs Nash do, if Mr Nash hits her? This, for us at least, is the most important question of all. And it doesn’t seem that anyone involved in this case has focused on this for more than a fleeting moment.

For all their excitement at Judge Tabor’s seemingly erudite balancing act, the domestic violence charities, like Women’s Aid and RISE have not asked the one crucial question: did Mr and Mrs Nash receive any kind of counselling or therapy throughout this process?

There is no mention of anyone being given proper treatment in this case. Mr Nash appears to have had conversations with the probation service about his conduct, but no therapy. Mrs Nash, although widely accepted to be the victim, does not seem to have been offered any kind of counselling for this.

And all of this goes a rather long way to explaining why, three years on from the creation of the Restraining Order, neither Mr Nash, nor Mrs Nash have any better understanding of what went wrong the first time round.

A recipe for disaster, not a delicate balancing act, then. If Judge Tabor really wants to do this couple a favour, and please all camps in this case, he will need to think long and hard about sending two people back into a marriage still marred by misunderstanding and malign conduct.

 

Share this:

  • Tweet
  • WhatsApp
  • Email
  • Telegram
  • Pocket
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Print

Like this:

Like Loading...

Question It!

09 Monday Sep 2013

Posted by Natasha in Question It

≈ Leave a comment

As the concept of divorce spreads and evolves across the globe, some countries are starting to see interesting shifts in reasons and decisions behind divorces. This latest research from the United Arab Emirates by the government-led Marriage Fund cites the top 10 reasons why divorce appears to be on the rise in the UAE. Some of the reasons are distinctly cultural, like polygamy, but others are startlingly similar to research in the UK which tends to echo some of the reasons for divorce.

Our question for you this week, then, is this: Do you think this latest research is spot on, or are there bigger reasons at play which might lead to divorce and which are less cultural and more universal?

face_question_mark

Share this:

  • Tweet
  • WhatsApp
  • Email
  • Telegram
  • Pocket
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Print

Like this:

Like Loading...

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 8,528 other subscribers

Contact Researching Reform

For Litigants in Person

September 2013
M T W T F S S
 1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
30  
« Aug   Oct »

Archives

  • Follow Following
    • Researching Reform
    • Join 815 other followers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • Researching Reform
    • Customize
    • Follow Following
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Report this content
    • View site in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar
 

Loading Comments...
 

    %d bloggers like this: