header-logo header-logo

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

Sharing is caring?

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

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll