Freely Available British and Irish Public Legal Information
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
England and Wales Family Court Decisions (other Judges)
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> England and Wales Family Court Decisions (other Judges) >> S (A Child) [2014] EWFC B224 (10 June 2014)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWFC/OJ/2014/B224.html
Cite as: [2014] EWFC B224
[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
IMPORTANT NOTICE
This judgment was delivered in private. The judge has given leave for this version of the judgment to be published on condition that (irrespective of what is contained in the judgment) in any published version of the judgment the anonymity of the child[ren] and members of their [or his/her] family must be strictly preserved. All persons, including representatives of the media, must ensure that this condition is strictly complied with. Failure to do so will be a contempt of court.
Case No: GA13C90001
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
FAMILY DIVISION
NEWCASTLE-UPON-TYNE DISTRICT REGISTRY The Law Courts
The Quayside
Newcastle-upon-Tyne
NE1 3LA
IN THE MATTER OF THE CHILDREN ACT 1989/
ADOPTION AND CHILDREN ACT 2002
AND IN THE MATTER OF: S (A CHILD)
Tuesday, 10th June 2014
Before:
HER HONOUR JUDGE MOIR
Sitting as a Judge of the High Court
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Re: S (A Child)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Counsel for the Local Authority: Unknown
Counsel for the Mother: Unknown
Counsel for the Father: Unknown
Counsel for the Child: Unknown
Hearing dates: Tuesday, 10th June 2014
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
APPROVED JUDGMENT
Transcribed from the Official Tape Recording by
Apple Transcription Limited
Suite 204, Kingfisher Business Centre, Burnley Road, Rawtenstall, Lancashire BB4 8ES
Telephone: 0845 604 5642 – Fax: 01706 870838
1. THE JUDGE: If I can very briefly deal then with the matters that we have taken some time to discuss, but rightly taken some time to discuss, because this is a complex matter. I have already indicated that I take the view that it is unfortunate that there has been a delay, for whatever reason, in this matter coming before this court.
2. I do not need to set out the background to this matter in any more detail than to say that there were proceedings which were referable to F’s family and his experience as a child in 2002. They were proceedings covering a wide range of information and consideration, which resulted in a detailed judgment provided by Mrs Justice Black in relation to findings of fact in, I think, November 2001 and the welfare hearing in July 2002.
3. The proceedings with which I am currently concerned are in respect of A, the child of F and M and, additionally, proceedings in relation to B are also going to be the responsibility of this court, as she is a child of M and Z. They are separate proceedings, however.
4. The first issue that arises in relation to the proceedings concerning A is in respect of the expert report provided by Dr Stephanie Hill, which report has informed the court of the father’s present position. The psychological assessment of F has been undertaken by Dr Hill but without the detailed content of the judgment of Mrs Justice Black having been made available to F the view that is taken, in my view appropriately, is that the content of those judgments needs to be made available to Mr Smith. He needs to have the opportunity to assimilate the content and information provided within the judgments and Dr Hill needs to provide an addendum to the court as to the considerations and risks that there may be, updated by reference to F’s reactions, thoughts and abilities to deal with the content of the judgment.
5. Clearly, it is a piece of work that needs the expert input of Dr Hill, both in relation to the practicalities of F being made aware of the content of the judgment and assessing his reaction thereto. It is right that Dr Hill undertakes the task of introducing the judgment to F and assessing his reactions thereto.
6. In my view, it is a global piece of work and cannot be undertaken other than as a whole; to divide it up in any way would mean that the information available to the court is incomplete. F’s ability to deal with the information that is being imparted to him is very much part of the psychological assessment which will be provided to the court. I therefore take the view that it is necessary that this piece of work is undertaken, that this assessment is provided to the court and that Dr Hill is the appropriate expert to do so.
7. As far as the wider disclosure of those judgments, Miss Wood has obtained instructions from her client, sensibly, that it is unnecessary for the entirety of the judgment to be disclosed to M. It would be helpful for an executive summary to be prepared and agreed between the parties. The entirety of the judgments must be made available to the legal advisors for M, but the court orders that the judgments themselves are not provided to M, although permission to discuss whatever is appropriate, of course, is given to the legal advisers and any executive summary which is provided is not removed from the office of the solicitor for M.
8. I make it plain that the content of these judgments is confidential, that any attempt to publish, and by that I mean talk about, the content of these judgments outside the ambit of these proceedings is a contempt of court and will be taken extremely seriously if it is proved that there has been a breach of confidentiality. I direct that it must be right to say, not just to M but also to F, I do not suppose he would want to discuss these, the judgments, more widely, but just to make it clear there are reasons why they should not be discussed more widely.
9. The issue then, we turn to the independent social worker. I have indicated by views in relation to both Part 25 applications before me. I take the view it is necessary to have an independent social work report in respect of F. It is highly unusual for the court to take the view that there should be an independent report, but the background to this matter persuades me to the view that it is necessary. The social work report in relation to F is, I think I described it as, thin. I do not know whether information was provided or not in relation to the mother of F’s child, C, and his involvement with Y and the anticipated birth of C but it has not been factored in at all to the assessment before the court. F is in the process of, I will call it, “being rehabilitated” into the household of his partner and child.
10. Newcastle Local Authority see the unification of the family as their goal and of pursuing that goal. Gateshead take the view that the appropriate plan of action for A is adoption, clearly very different plans. This is a complex case and I do take the view the court needs to have the assistance of the independent report which will be provided by Pauline Fairburn.
11. The mother also seeks an independent social work assessment. Her position is very different. Mr Brown, on behalf of the Local Authority, in his position statement, has set out the concerns about the mother and I think Miss Woolridge referred to them as “lifestyle concerns”. There has been, it seems, attempts made on three separate occasions, to carry out assessments following the birth of A which M has failed to fully engage in. Miss Wood argues on her behalf that there were communication difficulties in that the appointments were arranged at times when contact was to take place and, Miss Wood says, understandably, M prioritised the contact.
12. I am not satisfied that the court needs, at this juncture, an independent report in relation to M. If the matters that Miss Wood raises in relation to the progress and change that M has demonstrated are correct then those are matters which the court can consider, upon hearing the evidence of the mother, I am certainly willing to give permission for the filing of the statement from housing updating the position from the general practitioner updating the position. I am concerned that the hair strand testing has not taken place, I am told because the mother dyed her hair. I am unable to comment because I do not know when that took place, whether before or after the order was made for hair strand testing, but clearly it is important that the court has information in relation to mother’s drug use and I am told the general practitioner will be able to provide information in respect thereof.
13. If, of course, the court is of the view that mother has made changes sufficient to enable there to be a proper consideration of her involvement for the future which requires a further assessment, then consideration can be given to that at the time, but presently I do not take the view that an independent social work report in relation to mother is necessary to enable the court to deal with this both fully and justly.
14. I want information provided by way of statement form in relation to the mother’s absence today. I put it in those terms not because I am criticising mother for not being here today, but I want the evidence to back up the very serious allegations she has made that she was fearful of coming to court today because of threats that had been made to her by F’s family. These are very serious allegations. I make it clear that I take the view they are also very relevant allegations in relation to the overall picture and therefore I want the evidence in statement form before the court, exhibiting the Facebook entries which it is said have been received.
15. At present, I want those Facebook entries which are relevant to the mother saying that she has not attended court because she has been threatened. Clearly, if further issues arise out of whatever statement is provided I will give permission for F to file a response. I do not know that it is going to be necessary, but if it is necessary I will give permission for that response to be filed.
[Judgment ends]