B Mahendra reports on recent cases
The facts of the extraordinary case of Re W (a child) (non-accidental injury: expert evidence) [2007] EWHC 136(Fam), [2007] All ER (D) 159 (Apr) exposed the failings of both expert evidence and the processes of the family justice system. When the case ended in a resounding mea culpa (proffered) by the law, it was held that the child, now aged three, had never suffered non accidental injury and that its parents could be completely exonerated of any wrongdoing; their care of the child had, been exemplary. To get some sense of the Kafkaesque nightmare suffered by the parents one must read the long and exemplary judgment given by Mr Justice Ryder.
The much simplified facts were that the child, after developing normally for a few weeks after birth, developed symptoms and signs of a localised neurological disorder. The essence of the task of explanation to be given for this disorder was to determine whether or not the brain injury could have been due to natural events occurring at the time of birth or some time before or whether the
