header-logo header-logo

Keeping care proceedings fair

02 August 2024 / Max Konarek
Issue: 8082 / Categories: Opinion , Child law , Health , Personal injury , Criminal
printer mail-detail
184290
The Suspected Inflicted Head Injury Service could be in breach of Art 6 & 8 rights, argues Max Konarek
  • Family lawyers have raised serious concerns about the Suspected Inflicted Head Injury Service (SIHIS), which is already being piloted.
  • This article argues the service may be in breach of parties’ Art 6 and 8 rights in care proceedings, and that it needs more consultation and transparency.

Picture the scenario: pre fact-finding hearing in care proceedings, your client is alleged to have caused serious harm to a child. That harm includes what is said to be a non-accidental head injury—all medical experts instructed in your case are against your client in the reports they have written. No wiggle room arises from the experts’ meeting that has taken place. If anything, the experts’ views have solidified further against your client. Many would say: ‘Game over. The outcome is inevitable.’ I would say everything is to play for. But why?

The cross examination of medical experts in these cases by specialist and highly

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Kadie Bennett, Anthony Collins

NLJ Career Profile: Kadie Bennett, Anthony Collins

Kadie Bennett, senior associate at Anthony Collins and chair of the Resolution West Midlands Group, discusses her long-standing passion for family law and calls for unity in the profession

Osborne Clarke—Lara Burch

Osborne Clarke—Lara Burch

Firm appoints new UK senior partner for 2026

Keoghs—Louise Jackson & Katie Everson

Keoghs—Louise Jackson & Katie Everson

Healthcare and sports legal team expands in the north west

NEWS
Lawyers and users of the business and property courts are invited to share their views on disclosure, in particular the operation of PD 57AD and the use of Technology Assisted Review (TAR) and artificial intelligence (AI)
Social media giants should face tortious liability for the psychological harms their platforms inflict, argues Harry Lambert of Outer Temple Chambers in this week’s NLJ
The Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024—once heralded as a breakthrough—has instead plunged leaseholders into confusion, warns Shabnam Ali-Khan of Russell-Cooke in this week’s NLJ
The Employment Appeal Tribunal has now confirmed that offering a disabled employee a trial period in an alternative role can itself be a 'reasonable adjustment' under the Equality Act 2010: in this week's NLJ, Charles Pigott of Mills & Reeve analyses the evolving case law
Caroline Shea KC and Richard Miller of Falcon Chambers examine the growing judicial focus on 'cynical breach' in restrictive covenant cases, in this week's issue of NLJ
back-to-top-scroll