Children and Families Act 2014


Children and Families Act 2014

2014 CHAPTER 6

A family court judge has slammed social services . ~  Northants Herald & Post, Thursday 5 February 2015

A family court judge has slammed social services .
~ Northants Herald & Post, Thursday 5 February 2015

UNITED KINGDOM – An Act to make provision about children, families, and people with special educational needs or disabilities; to make provision about the right to request flexible working; and for connected purposes.

[13th March 2014] http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2014/6/enacted

PART 1 Adoption and contact

  1. Adoption

    1. 1.Contact between prescribed persons and adopted person’s relatives

    2. 2.Placement of looked after children with prospective adopters

    3. 3.Repeal of requirement to give due consideration to ethnicity: England

    4. 4.Recruitment, assessment and approval of prospective adopters

    5. 5.Adoption support services: personal budgets

    6. 6.Adoption support services: duty to provide information

    7. 7.The Adoption and Children Act Register

Via Termination of Parental Rights.

Termination of Parental Rights

Children from low-income households are more likely than children from middle and high-income households to be reported to child protective service agencies.

USA – The focus of termination of parental rights (TPR) evaluations is the best interest of the child (Barone, Weitz, & Witt, 2005). However, this automatically limits the evaluator’s ability to be impartial and fair. An evaluator must follow ethical guidelines that declare that he or she must practice impartiality and be fair and accurate according to EPPCC Guidelines 2.01, 2.04, and 9.01, as well as SGFP Guidelines 1.02 and 4.02.02 (American Psychological Association, 2010; American Psychology-Law Society, 2011). This ethical dilemma of bias is an inherent part of TPR cases. There is often emotional decision-making involved, and testimony should be based on an adequate scientific foundation with valid and reliable principles to back it up, not emotions alone (APA, 2010; AP-LS, 2011; Rogers & Ewing, 1989). Ultimate testimony is influenced by this bias and emotion, and is therefore problematic, but penultimate testimony does not generalize as much (Allman & Woodward, 2008; Rogers & Ewing, 1989; Slobogin, 1989). This will ultimately leave less room for bias and more room for objectivity, and will therefore allow the evaluator to adhere to the ethical guidelines and remain impartial and fair to all parties involved in termination of parental rights cases (Rogers & Ewing, 2003; Slobogin, 1989). Continue reading

IN THE NORTHAMPTON COUNTY COURT  His Honour Arthur Anthony JUDGE RUMBELOW QC  A Circuit Court Judge Assigned to the Northern Circuit.

CASE NUMBER NN13P00882

 

Zam Zam in Northampton

Zam Zam in Northampton

 

Ilona Bodin - Court Service and much more - Russian and Ukrainian Interpreter and Translator.

Ilona Bodin – Court Service and much more – Russian and Ukrainian Interpreter and Translator.

Advertisements

About towardchange

Your ‘Family Rights’ believing in the best interest of children. The issues which are important to me are, children and their families, the injustices to parents, which may occur, because of inadequate information, mistakes or corruption. This is happening every day. every minute and every second. For years I have campaigned for the rights of children and their voices to be heard.
Gallery | This entry was posted in blog, Care Proceedings, Care Proceedings, Family Law, News and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s