Welcome to another week.

Our question this week is very straightforward.

If the government were to launch a full inquiry into children’s social care in England and Wales, which areas would you like to see examined?

Welcome to another week.

Simple adoption is a form of adoption used in France, which does not sever family ties between the child and their biological parents.

While the terms of a simple adoption may vary within the countries that implement the policy, in France a child can keep their biological parents’ last name, and retains their inheritance rights.

Under simple adoptions, adopted children effectively have two families and contact is encouraged with both biological and adoptive parents.

The UK currently implements a full adoption policy, which sever a child’s ties with its biological parents and very rarely allows for regular and meaningful post adoption contact. Instances where post-adoption contact do occur, are often referred to as open adoptions.

Our question this week, then, is just this: do you think the UK should remove its full adoption policy and replace it with simple adoptions? 

We are running polls on Facebook and Twitter asking the same question, so please do choose one of these platforms and have your say.

If you don’t use Twitter or Facebook, please leave a ‘yes’ or ‘no’ as a comment on this post, and feel free to add any further thoughts you like.

Twitter Poll

Facebook Poll

Welcome to another week.

As the new year begins, our question is just this: what changes in child protection would you like to see in 2020?

A case in which a mother blocked the father from having contact with their son over grounds that the father was domestically abusive and had raped her, will now go to a fact finding hearing.

The mother lost custody of her four year old son after making the claims in court.

The initial ruling raised concerns after the the judge overseeing the case said the woman had not been raped because she had not fought back during the encounter.

Judge Tolson was criticised by the mother and her legal team for failing to make factual determinations on the several allegations around domestic violence raised by the mother, and for his outdated views on rape.

Established research confirms that victims of rape often freeze or become passive when being attacked.

The case was heard in the Family Division of the High Court last Thursday, where Ms Justice Russell said a new fact-finding hearing would take place and would be handled by another judge.

Our question this week, is just this: should parents who are found guilty of domestic abuse, or rape, be allowed to have contact with their children?

Welcome to another week, and apologies for our absence, work has been a little busy.

Our question this week focuses on child rights.

As the system still struggles to understand children and how their wishes belie important needs, we wanted to ask you: in what ways do you think the system could truly put children first? 

Welcome to another week.

Family law body Resolution has revised its guide to working with Litigants in Person, and there are a number of interesting suggestions.

For example, in child protection cases, the guidance suggests that aggressive or inflammatory language in lawyers’ communications both written and verbal should be set aside in favour of polite and considerate communications.

The guide also asks lawyers to think carefully about whether a C1A form – which is used to set down allegations of harm and domestic violence – needs to be submitted.

The guidance aims to try to preserve any goodwill between the parents where possible by trying to reduce friction which can be caused by aggressive form filing (rather than legitimate filing).

Our question this week, is this: what would you like to see in to the guidance? 

Welcome to another week.

Our question for the week is just this: using one word, describe what you think is missing inside the family court system….

Welcome to another week.

A letter from a member of the public in Brighton’s Argus newspaper has suggested councils should take seriously overweight children into care, as the phenomenon amounted to child neglect and abuse.

Mike Howard, from Greentree’s Crescent, in Sompting told the Argus that while the measure sounded draconian, it was the only way “to seriously address the problem”, and that Sally Davies, the former Chief Medical Officer for England, had offered a pointless solution to the issue in placing a ban on eating while on public transport.

Mr Howard said:

“A seriously overweight child is prima facia evidence of child neglect by the parents and should be treated as such. Feckless parents, who are clearly neglecting their child’s welfare need to be offered training on health and nutrition, which it would be reasonable to expect them to pay for, followed by a period of monitoring of their child’s health.

If, at the end of this period there is no improvement in the child’s well-being then the possibility of taking the child into care should be  seriously considered.”

Research tells us that children can become overweight for a variety of reasons, including genetics, a lack of physical activity, unhealthy eating patterns, or a combination of these factors. In some cases, becoming overweight can be caused by medical conditions.

Our question this week then, is just this: do you agree with Mr. Howard? 

Welcome to another week.

We thought we’d ask a straightforward and simple question this time: can you describe the family courts in one word?

Welcome to another week.

A BBC investigation has uncovered hundreds of children going missing from care every year in the North East.

The probe discovered that 11 local authorities lost 596 youngsters from 2014 to April this year.

The local authority which lost the most children during the five year period was Sunderland City Council, followed by Newcastle City Council and then Durham County Council.

One teenager told the BBC that he found being in care frightening, and that carers hit him and “treated him like rubbish.”

On being questioned over the number of children going missing in their care, spokespeople for Sunderland, Newcastle and Northumberland said the councils had child-focused strategies and that the safety of the children in their care was their priority.

Our question this week then, is this: why do you think councils are losing children inside the care system?