This article in Family Law Week is entitled Court of Appeal to consider the test for challenge by parents who have not consented to adoption.
It refers to this ‘test’:
“So once an adoption application is challenged by the natural parent at a very late stage, it is easy to see that to avert the progress, the completion of the progress to adoption, the applicant has to clear three fences.
The first is to establish the necessary change of circumstances.
The second is then to satisfy the court that, in the exercise of discretion, it would be right to grant permission.
The third and final stage would of course be to persuade the court at the opposed hearing to refuse the adoption order and to reverse the direction in which the child’s life has travelled since the inception of the original public law care proceedings.”
I’m still learning about the ‘culture’ that surrounds the secrecy of family courts and results in adoptions without parental consent. And what are petitions, when it comes to parents and children suffering?
Every day in the life of a child forcibly away from its parents is “wrong” or “plainly wrong”, in my view.
But judges on different levels of ladder or hierarchy of job or of court express it their way. E.g. in Wakefield, a judge is supposed to have said in 2010, in Criminal Court:
“That despite evidence of a number of crimes, family law is separate from the rest of the body of law and cannot be prosecuted.”
Maybe it does get more and more difficult to pretend that everything is ethical, moral, fair, reasonable and correct what goes on behind closed doors?
Funny, how the same judges keep popping up as one studies this subject…
- ABOLITION of Adoptions without Parental Consent – our Petition to the European Parliament (punishmentwithoutcrime.wordpress.com)
- Thousands of Irish women may sue over illegal adoptions to America and elsewhere (irishcentral.com)
- INTERNATIONAL CONCERNS about UK Law and a Barrister’s Critique of Family Courts – Calling on MPs (punishmentwithoutcrime.wordpress.com)