header-logo header-logo

22 May 2015 / Jonathan Herring
Issue: 7653 / Categories: Features , Family
printer mail-detail

Taking sides

nlj_7653_herring

Jonathan Herring questions the family courts’ treatment of wilful children

A relationship breaks down. Acrimony fills the air. Accusations fly. The father says the mother is stopping the children from seeing him. The mother says the children don’t want to see their father, unsurprisingly given what he has done. The lawyers wade in and it’s off to court. What is a judge to do?

Basic legal principles

The family courts have been struggling to find the correct legal solution to such cases for decades. The basic legal principles are clear. The judge must make the order which will best promote the welfare of the child. In most cases that will mean the child will spend time with both parents. There is now an impressively large number of orders available to judges in cases of disputed contact ranging from imprisonment of a parent seen to be preventing the children seeing the other parent; to an order prohibiting a parent seeing a child. Increasingly courts will rely on therapists and mediators to fashion a solution. Many experts in the field believe that in deeply conflicted cases there

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll