This essay will first address the statute used and interpretation of the threshold test by the courts, and then focus on cases involving vulnerable children to assess whether the statute in The Children Act 1989 is sufficient in protecting these children from harm. I will look at the argument in favour of the current approach taken by the courts, and the counter-argument in favour of changing the current approach. The arguments are delicately balanced and the law is always developing, so it will be interesting to see how the Supreme Court resolves this issue in future. The grounds for making a supervision or care order can be found in in s.31 of The Children Act 1989. Before a supervision or care order can be made, there are four areas that must be established. The court must show that ‘the child concerned is suffering or likely to suffer, significant harm’. Under s.31(2)(b) it states that, ‘The harm, or likelihood of harm, is attributable to: (i) the care given to the child, or likely to be given to him if the order were not made, not being what it would be reasonable to expect a parent to give him; or (ii) the child’s being beyond parental control’. The last two criteria are that the making of the order would promote the welfare of the child, and it is better for the child than making no order at all. A care order was explained in Hunt’s major study on care proceedings as a “last resort” and should only be used if all other options have been explored . The first two parts illustrate the threshold test. There are definitions under s.31(9) of The Children Act 1989 for the words used in s.31(2)(a) of the Children Act 1989. Harm is defined as ‘ill-treatment or the impairment of health or development’. ‘Development’ is defined as ... ... middle of paper ... ...d, ‘so far as the threshold conditions are concerned, the factor which seems to me to outweigh all others is the prospect than an unidentified, and unidentifiable, carer may inflict further injury on a child he or she has already severely damaged’. This approach was later applied in Merton LBC v K . Works Cited • A. Bainham, ‘Uncertain Perpetrators and Siblings at Risk’ (2011) The Cambridge Law Journal 3 (70) pp. 508-511 • C. Cobley & N. Lowe, ‘Interpreting the Threshold Criteria Under Section 31(2) of the Children Act 1989 – the House of Lords Decision in Re B’ (2009) Modern Law Review 72 (3) • C. Cobley & N. Lowe, ‘The stautory “threshold” under section 31 of the Children Act 1989 – time to take stock’ (2011) Law Quarterly Review 396 • J. Hunt et al, ‘The Last Resort’ (1999) • The Guardian Newspaper, ‘National: News: Care Decision’ (18 November 2008) p.8
Parton, N., Thorpe, D. and Wattam, C. (1997) Child Protection Risk and Moral Order, London: Macmillan
The areas in which these reforms should occur are twofold. One argument that Judge Ross raises repeatedly is that measures should be taken to insure the sustainability of Family Court employees through more manageable caseloads. The necessity of this change is evident in countless examples of children suffering as a result of constantly changing, thin-spread, staff. In one particular instance, a six month child abuse case is adjourned because they “don’t have the medical records” in time (128). The second argument that can be implicitly made based off of Judge Ross’s expressed frustrations is that, if given the proper time for consideration, there should be more room for consideration of circumstance in Family Court. From a legal standpoint, there is substantial evidence for the validity of a common law approach to Family Court over the traditional civil law. Judge Ross establishes that ideally “In each case to protect children, to assure due process, to remain neutral until the facts are established, to apply common sense and sound judgment within the framework of the law in making decisions—the Family Court judge’s charge lies quite outside the arena of public policy, comment, and debate” (104). However, as seen in many of his cases, the combination of the overflowing workload and an inability to apply proper consideration to any given circumstance makes it impossible for the pre-existing
The Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006 was established because an American boy was abducted form a Florida shopping mall and was later found murdered. The act was signed into law by George W. Bush on July 27, 2006. This act is established to protect children from sexual exploitation and violent crime to prevent child abuse and child pornography to promote internet safety. This act is also known as the sex offender registration and notification act. It was established with the intention to strengthen laws related to child sexual predators. This law was instructed for each state and/or territory to apply criteria’s for posting offenders data on the internet.
Throughout this essay, the health, safety and welfare policy and practise that came about after the Victoria Climbie case will be reviewed and evaluated. After arriving in England in November 1991 from the Ivory Coast, eight-year old Victoria Climbie suffered abuse from her great-aunt, Marie-Therese Kouao, and her great-aunts partner. The anguish and eventual murder of Victoria in 2000 from hypothermia, caused by malnourishment and damp conditions, provoked ‘the most extensive investigation into the child protection system in British history’ as described by Batty (Macleod-Brudenell, 2004). The high media profiled incident exposed a clear lack of precision and communication between all professionals and agencies involved. This is shown by the fact that the mistreatment Victoria was suffering had gone unnoticed by the social services, police and NHS staff, who failed to make each other aware of the clear danger signs. Within the Lord Laming Inquiry into Victoria Climbie’s death (2003), it can be seen that some features recur time after time in child abuse cases; inadequate resources to meet demands, inexperience and lack of skill of individual social workers. In addition, it can also be seen that crucial procedures were evidently not being followed. The procedure that was established after this case included the recommendations made by Lord Laming such as the Green Paper of Every Child Matters (DfES, 2003) and the Children Act (DfES, 2004). These ensure that all children have the fundamental right to be protected from harm and abuse. In addition to this, it also certifies all adults who come into contact with children and families have a duty to safeguard and promote the welfare of children.
Another, key point is that in the UK the statistic for neglect by parent on children is extremely high, (Radford et al, 2011) has said “In England, 18,220 children were the subject of a child protection plan under t...
The criminal case covered in this essay involve a triple family murder done by an 18 year old student named Jason Alexander Downie. Jason migrated from Kilmarnock, Scotland to Adelaide, Australia in 2006 with his mother. He was known to have sexual infatuation with a 16 year old named Chantelle Rowe (Shears 2012) and was jealous with one of his friend who was dating her. Downie’s lawyer said that his client has no intention killing anyone and only wanted to “confront Chantelle’s boyfriend in the mistaken belief that he was staying [at her home...
When a court is dealing with proceedings relating to a child, section 1 of the Children Act 1989 (CA 1989) governs that the court’s paramount consideration shall lie with the child’s welfare. The term paramount was explained by Lord Macdermott in J v C which means ‘that the child’s welfare is to be treated as the top item in a list of items relevant to the matter of question’. His Lordship went on to explain that when all the relevant facts and circumstances are taken into account and weighed, the outcome chosen by the court is based on the interests of the relevant child. Therefore any other party’s interest is only considered as far as it contributes to promote the child’s best interest.
...e whole case will be reverted, but they may have conclusive evidence that has been over looked. As the child’s social worker, I would hope that at the end of the proceedings that there was a happy ending for all of the people concerned, but it would still have to be David’s interests that would come first.
In the United States there are approximately 397,000 children in out-of home care, within the last year there was about 640,000 children which spent at least some time in out-of-home care. More than 58,000 children living in foster care have had their biological parental rights permanently terminated (Children’s Rights, 2014). Due to the rising number of children in foster care and the growing concerns of the safety, permanency, and well-being of children and families, the Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997 was signed into law. On November 19, 1997, President Bill Clinton signed the Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997, to improve the safety of children, to promote adoption and other permanent homes for children who need them, and to support families (Child Welfare League of America). The Adoption and Safe Families Act also promotes adoption by offering incentive payments for States. During the FY of 1999-2003 the payment to states which had exceeded the average number of adoptions received $20 million (Child Welfare League of America). The ASFA improved the existing federal child welfare law to require that the child’s health and safety be a “paramount” concern in any efforts made by the state to preserve or reunify the child’s family, and to provide new assurances that children in foster care are safe (Shuman, 2004).
LSCB, (2013), SAFEGUARDING CHILDREN, YOUNG PEOPLE AND VULNERABLE ADULTS POLICY, (www.safechildren-cios.co.uk), [Assessed 1 November 2013].
The uniform adoption act of 1994 was drafted by the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws (NCCUSL). The Uniform Adoption Act of 1994 seals adoption records for 99 years, makes it illegal to search for birth parents by anyone including the adoptee, shortens revocable consent periods that many states have enacted to a dismissal 8 days from birth of the child (Uniform Adoption Act, 1). This proposal of the uniform adoption act just shows what is wrong with the adoption process, adoptees should have the right to search for their birth parents for medical and personal reasons.
If the local authority establishes that the child is a child in need or at risk of harm, it has a duty under section 47 of the Children Act (1989) to make a care plan or child protection plan to provide support which involves adequate supervision and checks to ensure that the child is no longer at risk. The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989) promotes empowerment for children as they can exercise their right to express their views and be heard and their best interest would be at the centre of the intervention and social workers need to ensure that decisions made are not affected by the influence from family or professionals they work with (Lee & Hudson,
Vulnerable patients are those who cannot act on their own to protect themselves from threats to their health and dignity. A vulnerable patient encompasses a wide range of individuals and includes both adults and children. An adult is a person who is over 18 years of age and is described as a vulnerable patient if they are suffering from learning, physical and sensory disability. This includes disorders such as autism, cystic fibrosis and blindness and also includes sufferers of dementia. A child is a person aged less than 18 years and is described as vulnerable regardless if they have a disability. Irrespective of whether a child is living independently or in further education they are still entitled to services or protection under the Children Act (1989). A child is deemed as vulnerable as they are unable to protect themselves and this vulnerability is judged on varying factors such as, physical and emotional development, ability to communicate needs, mobility, size and dependence.
...t to providing the child with protection when determining what is in the child’s best interests. The risk of violence within the home is considered when contemplating on parenting orders, so the child is not exposed to what is considered an unacceptable risk.
Today's parenting has also played a key role in revision of the legal system as it relates to family law. Due to the increasing amount of child abuse cases, there has been a great amount of emphasis placed upon the disciplinary actions of parents today. In today's society with drug abuse being more prevalent and single family households becoming more common, the pressures of child rearing have dramatically increased.