Magistrate sacked for opposing same-sex adoption is suspended by NHS – The Guardian

‘A Christian magistrate who was sacked after voicing his opposition to adoption by same-sex parents has been suspended as a non-executive director by an NHS trust.’

Full story

The Guardian, 27th March 2016

Source: www.guardian.co.uk

Ethics on the bench and in the witness box: The Round-up – UK Human Rights Blog

‘A highly experienced magistrate – Richard Page – has been sacked for airing views opposing same-sex couples being allowed to adopt.’

Full story

UK Human Rights Blog, 16th March 2016

Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com

Adoption, foreign nationals and parental consent: where are we now? – Family Law Week

‘Michael Jones, Barrister, Deans Court Chambers, analyses the implications of a recent judgment in Re JL and AO (Babies Relinquished for Adoption) which concerned the adoption of children with the consent of the foreign parents.’

Full story

Family Law Week, 17th March 2016

Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk

New Acts – legislation.gov.uk

Psychoactive Substances Act 2016

Cities and Local Government Devolution Act 2016

Welfare Reform and Work Act 2016

Education and Adoption Act 2016

Childcare Act 2016

Charities (Protection and Social Investment) Act 2016

Supply and Appropriation (Anticipation and Adjustments) Act 2016

Source: www.legislation.gov.uk

Magistrate who opposed gay couples adopting to sue Michael Gove – The Guardian

‘A Christian magistrate who was sacked after opposing adoption by gay parents on national television is planning to sue Michael Gove over the decision.’

Full story

The Guardian, 13th March 2016

Source: www.guardian.co.uk

Christian judge struck off after controversial same-sex adoption comments – Daily Telegraph

Posted March 11th, 2016 in adoption, disciplinary procedures, homosexuality, magistrates, news by tracey

‘A Christian judge has been struck off after making controversial comments over same-sex adoption on national television.’

Full story

Daily Telegraph, 10th March 2016

Source: www.telegraph.co.uk

In re JL and AO (Babies Relinquished for Adoption) – WLR Daily

In re JL and AO (Babies Relinquished for Adoption): [2016] EWHC 440 (Fam)

‘In two cases babies, JL and AO, were born in England to mothers from Eastern Europe but relinquished at birth for adoption. In the case of JL the child, whose Estonian mother worked in England and whose putative father lived in Estonia, was accommodated by the local authority with the mother’s consent pursuant to an agreement under section 20 of the Children Act 1989 and was placed with foster carers. The mother gave her written consent to his adoption and the putative father, maternal family and the Estonian authorities all supported his adoption in this country. The local authority sought a placement order under section 21 of the Adoption and Children Act 2002. In the case of AO, the Hungarian parents working in England wished the child to be adopted in this country. AO had been removed at birth and placed with foster carers and had been made a ward of court. The local authority, children’s guardian and Hungarian authorities sought the child’s return to Hungary so that she could be placed for adoption there. Common issues arose as to what jurisdiction the court had to make orders facilitating such placements, (ii) the factors which had to be taken into account when making decisions about relinquished babies, the possible outcomes and the procedures to be followed and (iii) where a child born to nationals of a foreign country had been placed voluntarily in the care of a local authority, with a view to adoption or otherwise, whether the authority was under an obligation under the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations 1963 to inform the consular officials of that country about the placement. In the case of JL, the further issues arose whether the court had jurisdiction to make a placement order and what order, if any, should be made. In the case of AO, the further issues arose whether it was open to the court either to transfer jurisdiction to Hungary under Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 (“Brussels IIA”) or to make an order permitting the local authority to send AO to Hungary; and what order, if any, the court should make.’

WLR Daily, 3rd March 2016

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Children: Public Law Update (February 2016) – Family Law Week

Posted February 26th, 2016 in adoption, child abuse, jurisdiction, news by tracey

‘John Tughan QC of 4 Paper Buildings analyses recent significant judgments in public children law.’

Full story

Family Law Week, 22nd February 2016

Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk

Smoothing the adoption process – BBC News

Posted February 16th, 2016 in adoption, fostering, news by sally

‘Finding a permanent loving home for a baby approved for adoption can take take several months. In 2012, the government said it would change the law to allow potential adopters to foster a baby while the courts were deciding on its future. So what has the Foster to Adopt experience been like for those taking this route?’

Full story

BBC News, 19th February 2016

Source: www.bbc.co.uk

Who Guards the Guardians? – Family Law Week

‘The Association of Lawyers for Children and the National Association of Guardians ad Litem and Reporting Officers respond to recent guidance given in the Central Family Court on the need for guardians to justify their attendance at care hearings save in specified circumstances.’

Full story

Family Law Week, 31st January 2016

Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk

Government to change adoption law to address fall in court orders – Local Government Lawyer

Posted January 19th, 2016 in adoption, care orders, children, news, social services by sally

‘The Government is to change the law to make prioritising lifelong stability for vulnerable children with a loving family a legal requirement, the Department for Education has said.’

Full story

Local Government Lawyer, 18th January 2016

Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk

More children to be removed from biological parents and placed for adoption under ‘urgent’ new rules – The Independent

Posted January 14th, 2016 in adoption, care orders, children, news by sally

‘More children will be removed from their biological parents and placed for adoption, under “urgent” new rules to be announced by ministers.’

Full story

The Independent, 14th January 2016

Source: www.independent.co.uk

Family judge criticised for not naming council that breached father’s rights – The Guardian

‘A family court judge has come under fire after refusing to name a council that violated a man’s parental rights by taking his four-year-old daughter into care without a proper investigation.’

Full story

The Guardian, 10th January 2016

Source: www.guardian.co.uk

Adoption without parental consent is wrong in principle – Courts and Tribunals Judiciary

Posted December 3rd, 2015 in adoption, consent, speeches by tracey

‘The Family Justice Council held its 9th Annual Debate and panel discussion on Tuesday 24 November 2015. The topic for this year’s debate was adoption.’

Full debate

Courts and Tribunals Judiciary, 2nd December 2015

Source: www.judiciary.gov.uk

Adoptions from Abroad: Article 8 Fails to Assist – UK Human Rights Blog

Posted November 12th, 2015 in adoption, appeals, children, families, human rights, immigration, news, tribunals by sally

‘A child (SM) who was adopted in Algeria by a French couple living in the UK was refused an application for a right of entry as a family member. Having been overturned in the Upper Tribunal, the Entry Clearance Officer (ECO) successfully appealed to the Court of Appeal. SM was not, the court held, a family member of Mr M. A keen human rights observer might think this was an apparent infringement of article 8 ECHR (the right to family life).’

Full story

UK Human Rights Blog, 12th November 2015

Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com

“… this can no longer be tolerated”: a short guide to the correct use of section 20, Children Act 1989 – Family Law Week

‘Alex Laing, barrister of Coram Chambers, concludes his review of N (Children) (Adoption: Jurisdiction) by considering what the President said about section 20 agreements.’

Full story

Family Law Week, 11th November 2015

source: www.familylawweek.co.uk

Limping Infants and Article 15 BIIA: the “magisterial” judgment in In the Matter of N (Children) (Adoption: Jurisdiction) – Family Law Week

Posted November 10th, 2015 in adoption, appeals, care orders, EC law, foreign jurisdictions, news, treaties by sally

‘Alex Laing, barrister of Coram Chambers, considers two aspects of the decision in N (Children) (Adoption: Jurisdiction): (1) the jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to order the non-consensual adoption of a foreign child; and (2) the construction and use of Article 15 of Brussels IIA to transfer care proceedings.’

Full story

Family Law Week, 10th November 2015

Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk

Does Article 8 survive adoption? – UK Human Rights Blog

Posted October 6th, 2015 in adoption, human rights, news, parental rights by sally

‘There has been further consideration of potential post-adoption Article 8 rights for natural parents in a judgment by Peter Jackson J in the case of Seddon v Oldham MBC. There are no surprises in the conclusions he reaches.’

Full story

UK Human Rights Blog, 6th October 2015

Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com

Theresa May warned adoption law could affect border controls – Daily Telegraph

Posted October 6th, 2015 in adoption, appeals, immigration, news by sally

‘Court of Appeal says immigration cases could have to bow to adoption laws which must take life-long benefits into account.’

Full story

Daily Telegraph, 5th October 2015

Source: www.telegraph.co.uk

Seddon v Oldham Metropolitan Borough Council – WLR Daily

Posted October 2nd, 2015 in adoption, contact orders, human rights, law reports by tracey

Seddon v Oldham Metropolitan Borough Council; [2015] EWHC 2609 (Fam); [2015] WLR (D) 388

‘The making of an adoption order always brought to an end pre-existing rights under article 8 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms as between a birth parent and an adopted child, since those rights arose from, and co-existed with, the parent-child relationship which was extinguished by adoption. Furthermore, section 51A of the 2002 Act, as inserted, did not create or maintain an article 8 right as between a birth parent and an adopted child, nor was section 51A(4) incompatible with the Convention. However, a public body running a post-adoption letterbox service was obliged under article 8 to respect correspondence between a birth parent and an adopted child and adopters, the obligation arising from the nature of the correspondence and not from the former parent-child relationship.’

WLR Daily, 14th September 2015

Source: www.iclr.co.uk