Jersey Unreported Judgments

[2005]JRC016

royal court

(Family Division)

10^th February 2005

In the matter of the Adoption (Jersey) Law, 1961 - 1995.

And in the matter of V

Representation by Attorney General, on behalf of the Health and Social Services Committee, seeking an Order, under Article 4 (1)(b) of the Adoption (Jersey) Law, 1961 - 1995, declaring V free for adoption, which application is opposed by V's birth parents.

Application by the Committee for an Order dispensing with the birth parents' consent, on the grounds that it is being unreasonably withheld.

Mrs S. Sharpe, Crown Advocate, for the Health and Social Services Committee.

Advocate P.C. Harris for the birth parents.

judgment

the bailiff:

1.        This is an application by the Health and Social Services Committee for an order under Article 4 (1) (b) of the (Adoption Jersey) Law 1961, declaring a child, to whom we shall refer as V, free for adoption.

2.        The history can be very shortly stated.  V is the natural child of Mr and Mrs B, although she has never been cared for by them.  At 4 days old she was made the subject of a place of safety order and was placed with foster parents.  On 24^th September 1987, at the age of 6 weeks she was placed with different foster parents with whom she has remained ever since.  Unfortunately those foster parents have recently divorced, but V remains living in what was the family home with her foster mother to whom we shall refer as Mrs P. 

3.        V has now reached the age of 17.  She has been known by different names from those given her at birth and she wishes before she attains the age of majority in a few months' time to regularise her status as a member of the family with whom she has lived for practical purposes all her life.

4.        The natural parents, Mr and Mrs B, were asked for their consent to this adoption.  The initial response was to return the relevant form torn into a number of pieces with the word "No" written on them.  Subsequently, Mr and Mrs B have been advised by counsel and we have been greatly assisted by Mr Harris who appeared on their behalf this morning. 

5.        Mr Harris told us very candidly that he had found it difficult to obtain instructions from Mr and Mrs B.  Their instructions were unclear and sparse, although Mr Harris made it clear that they were not willing to consent to V's adoption. 

6.        The law which we have to apply is clear.  An amendment to the 1961 Law in 1995 provides that the first consideration is the need to safeguard and promote the welfare of the infant.  The law requires the Court to have due consideration to the wishes of the infant having regard to her age and understanding.  V has very clearly expressed her wishes to be adopted by Mrs P in an affidavit which has been placed before us. 

7.        We have, therefore, to ask ourselves whether adoption is in the best interests of the child and whether the natural parents are being unreasonable in withholding their consent.  We have no hesitation whatsoever in concluding that adoption is in the best interests of V and that her natural parents are being unreasonable in withholding their consent.  We, therefore, dispense with the need for the consent of Mr and Mrs B, and we free V for adoption by Mrs P.

Authorities

4 Halsbury (1999 re-issue): Vol 6: pp 225-7; 229-30.

4 Halsbury (Re-issue): Vol 5 (2): paras 1068 - 1077.

In re D (a Minor) (Adoption: Freeing Order) (1991) 1 FLR 48.

In re B (an Infant) (7^th October 1992) Jersey Unreported; [1992/177]; [1992 JLR N.8].

In re T (an Infant) [1987-88 JLR 677].

Adoption (Jersey) Law, 1961 - 1995: Articles 4, 5 & 8.