header-logo header-logo

Interfaith parenting

19 July 2012 / Hle Blog
Issue: 7523 / Categories: Blogs
printer mail-detail

HLE blogger Geraldine Morris examines the approach to religion in family proceedings

The media love a celebrity divorce, so the recent news that the actor and leading member of the Church of Scientology, Tom Cruise, is to divorce for the third time has inevitably attracted a lot of attention and speculation. While the lives of celebrities may seem far removed from those of ordinary mortals, one issue that has reportedly been a cause of concern to the third Mrs Cruise, Katie Holmes, is that of their daughter’s religious upbringing within the Church of Scientology.

Disagreements on religious upbringing may arise in any family. The Cruises have apparently settled their issues at a very early stage, a testament perhaps to good lawyers, but also possibly high stakes and reputation management. For those who can’t agree, there is plenty of guidance from the courts in this jurisdiction. Often cases are concerned with simple or small issues and established religion. Others, as with the majority of cases detailed hereafter, deal with more extreme circumstances.

The Court of Appeal took the view in Re R (A Minor) (Religious Sect) [1993] 2 FCR 525 that religious influences are significant in terms of a child’s future welfare and thus are one of the relevant circumstances when applying the principle of the paramountcy of the child’s welfare as set out in the Children Act 1989, s 1. Parents do not have to provide their child with any religious instruction at all, the issue tends to arise only where one parent is particularly keen for a child to receive religious instruction or where the parties are of different religions and have strong views.

Context is everything—there are no hard and fast rules relating to set religious practices or beliefs, the court will look at the reality of the child’s upbringing and family circumstances and the impact of any decision made in relation to religion…”

To continue reading go to: www.halsburyslawexchange.co.uk

Issue: 7523 / Categories: Blogs
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Birketts—trainee cohort

Birketts—trainee cohort

Firm welcomes new cohort of 29 trainee solicitors for 2025

Keoghs—four appointments

Keoghs—four appointments

Four partner hires expand legal expertise in Scotland and Northern Ireland

Brabners—Ben Lamb

Brabners—Ben Lamb

Real estate team in Yorkshire welcomes new partner

NEWS
Robert Taylor of 360 Law Services warns in this week's NLJ that adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) risks entrenching disadvantage for SME law firms, unless tools are tailored to their needs
The Court of Protection has ruled in Macpherson v Sunderland City Council that capacity must be presumed unless clearly rebutted. In this week's NLJ, Sam Karim KC and Sophie Hurst of Kings Chambers dissect the judgment and set out practical guidance for advisers faced with issues relating to retrospective capacity and/or assessments without an examination
Delays and dysfunction continue to mount in the county court, as revealed in a scathing Justice Committee report and under discussion this week by NLJ columnist Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School. Bulk claims—especially from private parking firms—are overwhelming the system, with 8,000 cases filed weekly
Charles Pigott of Mills & Reeve charts the turbulent progress of the Employment Rights Bill through the House of Lords, in this week's NLJ
From oligarchs to cosmetic clinics, strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs) target journalists, activists and ordinary citizens with intimidating legal tactics. Writing in NLJ this week, Sadie Whittam of Lancaster University explores the weaponisation of litigation to silence critics
back-to-top-scroll