Justice For Families

If you apply to discharge a care order only, in the Judges mind, he will be asking himself ... if he discharges the care order, the children could move back a step and onto an interim care order. The children in essence are in limbo because there is no determination of what order might be made next. The LA could argue that under an ICO, an assesment might be made and the children move back onto care orders. You can argue that the children's views wern't taken into consideration. The crunch of the matter is that the Judge would be unwilling to make an order (discharge of a care order) if he is likely (or possibly) to have to make a care order again.

The Judge (by seeing your application) can't see where this case is going (on paper).

A residence order automatically discharges a care order. Only people with PR can apply for Section 8 orders.

By applying for a residence order you are showing the Judge where you want the case to go.

By applying for an interim residence order, you are asking the Judge3 to keep things as they are (children living with you) while the court makes a decision about where the children live. Your children having legal representation will be in a position to have their views expressed to a Judge.

By inviting the LA to apply for an interim supervision order, you are showing the Judge that you are nt opposed to the LA observing the children in your care.

The Judge is expected to make the leist intrusive order regarding the children. Making no order would not help, because the LA would want to apply for a recovery order. The Judge could reject the recovery order application but that might cause the LA to appeal or make another application, so this would cause more distress.

The Judge could make a recovery order, though if you are applying for an interim residence (and residnece ) order, the Judge can ballance out details involving which order to make. Points he would take into consideration are... the children's wishes, ant the rest of the welfare checklist. The welfare of the child remains paramount when the court makes an order. The reason why you want to write a short statement showing the Judge how you plan on looking after the children fot the next few weeks/months and till you can show the Judge about how you plan on looking after the children for the rest of their childhood life. It is better to make a comparison, so you can show the Judge why LA care is not the best for your children (not hard to do - if a child is that happy in care, they would want to go back).

By asking for interim residence and inviting the LA (if they want to) to make an application for interim supervision orders, you are asking the Judge to not make a recovery order but to make a less distressing and more helpful order...the orders you want the Judge to consider.

The Judge should apply a "sucess" test and think about which order has more chance of sucess. In mu mind (and I hope the Judge as well), the Judge would be swayed to want to make an interim residence order, as long as he knows that the children will be safe and well cared for. Given the children's ages and the level of care 12 to 14 year olds need, the LA don't have much scope to argue that the care you give thechildren is that important. The Judge needs to keep in mind that the 3 children left care under their own steam and if the Judge makes a recovery order, the children go back, but can get back to you under their own steam again.....you can argue that if the Judge made a recovery order, the children might be exposed to risk because the children are determined to get home......and an interim residence order has more chance onf sucess.

The LA might claim that your children are disturbed and need therepy away from you - challange that point and ask for proof of the children being disturbed....etc. I expect the slimy LA lawyers might say that "nirmal children" don't run away from foster carers, but you can counter argue that the children don't see each other as often as siblings usually do and the children have been hurt by foster carers. The children are running away from a place they don't like and to a place where they feel safe and wanted......etc.

As long as you show the Judge that you are capable of looking after the children (show proof), that you are not a danger to the children (history of the children living with you without the LA applying for a recovery order is also proof) and your home being safe....etc. Then things should look optimistic fot you.

If any of the children hae special needs, the LA could have a supervision order so they can continue to monitor the special needs.

The case becomes predictable for all parties. Perhaps all parties might not be happy (most likely the LA not being happy).

That's how I would present the case, but I keep in mind that I am not the parent and the final decision about how to progress with your case rests with you. The more people who give advice, the more varied the advice becomes. Mobaldy is very experienced with helping families and I can see logic in his idea. His idea is much easier to manage and present. It's one application.

Please PM me with the name of the ISW.

No PR , they can give this to an NRP when in private they have no rights in public they can flip the script for money.Public court is more commercial and open to corruption.

Also keep an eye on children's solicitors they are the main lead to an expert witness and psych reports .

Stupid evil JUDGE JUST LIKE MINE!! Evil and rotten to the core. THERE ALL IN IT IT TOGTHER!! "I feel for you i really do and i do understand it is so frustrating"!! They are all like a pack of hungry wolves all slyly huddled together waiting for there next pray!!!

1) This is par for the course with LEA solicitors who are absolute bastards with every trick legitimate to win cases and will try to take over the case. I have seen this.

2) You should remind them that whatever you personally think your kids want to discharge their care orders and don't want to return to the foster carers.

3) The problem is solicitors on the Family Panel do not mount fighting defenses as the LEA and Guardians control their firm's income.
Unless you can find one who will you should consider continuing as LIP.
remind the judge this is your right. Even the judge said this in a recent case I was involved in.

The guardian states he is not happy for an ISW to have previous crapcass guardian experience (much more difficult than you would believe), he went on to suggest to the court that he could do the assessment himself. I disagreed with that suggestion as he had stated he did not want the ISW with guardian experience.

Lol you owned him

Hi,

There are a number of points in your post so I will try to address them all separately:

when crapcass visited my home he only spoke to the 2 youngest children, ommitting to speak with my older child, nor did he give any of them a wishes and feelings pack either

Did you not get the children's wishes and feelings into court by another route?

The status quo remains, children in my care.

That is good, the longer they are with you the less chance of the judge wanting to disturb the status quo - as long as the kids don't come to any harm or kick up a fuss. Remind them to be on their best behaviour!!!!

The guardian states he is not happy for an ISW to have previous crapcass guardian experience (much more difficult than you would believe), he went on to suggest to the court that he could do the assessment himself.

Independent at the very least means having no involvement with the case (what a wally).

I stated I did not want any the LA or Guardian appointed solicitor had suggested yet this is exactly what the result is! I sense railroading & I am not happy in the slightest. Independent is what it should be, a right to a fair trial and an impartial assessment, independent of ALL parties is exactly what it should be.

You need to read the recent judgement in the Webster case - there is a really important point of law in there about instructing expert witnesses (which is what an ISW is). Basically, even if both parties jointly appoint an expert it still does not stop each of the individual parties instructing someone else for a second opinion. There is even something in there to warn family court judges as to why it is so important to allow this. Print that judgement out in full, highlight the relevant bit and send it to the court and to all solicitors saying you are intending to instruct your own expert as well. Speak to your MKF about how you might get legal aid funding for the expert you have chosen - I know exactly which one you mean, sounds ideal.

They also did not like the fact that I had researched ISW databases.

That's because it proves you are capable of research and mounting your own defence. They'll like it even less when you start showing them you are researching the law (as in point above).

Keep Strong and good luck.

Hi,

Here is the link

http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/docs/judgme ... ildren.pdf

You need to see sections 192 to 197


With regard to "Wishes and Feelings" - just be careful the SS don't say those already expressed are out of date and the kids have changed their minds!!!! Before you go to court next time get the kids to write a short statement each:

My name is.... DOB ..... Age .... I have read my statement of ...Feb09 and nothing has changed. Those are still my wishes and feelings.

Get them to sign this and make sure you get a new update before every court hearing.

Your post says

Unfortunately the judge gave the LA leave to place the children in foster care should any of them say that is where they wished to be, so it is now more imperative to get our family the right assessment

Of course he didn't need to do this really as they already have a care order. Perhaps you need to sit down with each of the kids (on their own, not all together) and make it clear that if they mess about and start saying they'd rather be in foster care then that is exactly what will happen. I would expect if that happened your contact would be reduced to stop you "confusing" the kids.

It depends on the children's ages as to whether their wishes and feelings will be taken seriously. A child in a case I know is 10 and the wishes and feelings are not being taken seriously at all even though it is well documented what the child's wishes and feelings are.

Thanks FA - I believe Loving Mama's children are 14, 12 and 11 with the youngest rapidly approaching 12th birthday.

Have they been assessed for Gillick competence? Ages alone may not be enough particularly if the children have learning difficulties or childhood disorders.....

A recent case can be quoted in which the child was only 10 3/4 and held to be Gillick Competent by the Court of Appeal, also Mabon v Mabon.

1) Unless the SS can cite them having educational problems, immaturity etc. the kids here are Gillick Competent, can discharge their solicitor and sack the Guardian.

2) you should say they want to discharge their solicitor and get one of their own, and since there are disagreements with the Guardian, which there are, wish to discharge him - see Mabon v Mabon - and instruct the solictort themselves.

3) they must also as said sign statements that their views have not changed, as it is clear the SS will try to use this.

4) Also get a Voice advocate in, the kids must go this.

5) Your son is almost certainly suffering from an attachment disorder because his attachment TO YOU has been disrupted by him being taken away and put through various foster placments.

6) It's pretty rich of the Guardian saying it doesn't like an ISW being Cafcass trained as this is where many come from and they are part of the Guardians' professional body.

7) Getting an ISW from a Tavistock background is the right course, as there were the previous mntal health issues but also because of the Attachment issue.

I could not under any circumstances inflict the ISW we had on anyone!

Your oldest can basically tell the sneakey solicitor to get lost.

All she/he needs to do is go and find another solicitor, in Mabon v Mabon they just walked into another solictor's office.

They must apply on form 434 to blow away the Guardian, there may be problems with your youngest but try to get him to support his oldest b/c's as you can totally blow out the Guardian.

They should have an arguement with him so he is not representing their views - not difficult in view of his behaviour.

Mabon v Mabon - very important judgement is at;-
www.familylawweek.co.uk/site.aspx?i=ed393


The element you need is by Lord Justice Wall at part two, you see the relevance.

You got my full support on blowing away CAFCASS Guardians.
I'm reading these posts and taking notes...


I feel another video coming on... on some annotations to the get rid of the social worker video.

I'm very concerned that Voice won't intervene for a child who has a GAL appointed, as the GAL are the ones misrepresenting the children.

But I'm off to read mabon v mabon ....
Keep up this advice on enabling kids to fight the social workers directly.

They abuse parents and children alike, and we need to turn the law back on these social workers....