header-logo header-logo

Sharing is caring?

01 October 2012 / Robert Micklem
Issue: 7531 / Categories: Features , Divorce , Family
printer mail-detail

Parental rights should not trump children’s welfare, says Robert Micklem

This month saw the close of the government’s consultation on “Co-operative parenting following family separation”.

This sought to assess:

how the Children Act 1989 (CA 1989) could be amended to ensure courts adhere to the general principle that, on separation, it is in a child’s best interests for both parents to continue to play a role in their care and be jointly responsible for that child; and

whether the government should strengthen the court’s enforcement powers to deal with breaches of court-ordered contact arrangements.

Shared parenting

When deciding children matters, the courts already acknowledge that it is in a child’s best interest for both parents to be involved in their life. However, there is no express legislation to this effect and this has led to a social perception that the law does not fully recognise the importance both parents play in the upbringing of a child.

The government believes that enshrining the principle in law will restore public confidence in the

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

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll