Written evidence from PDJ Harrison (FC
15)
1. THE PARENTAL
RESPONSIBILITY CONCEPT
Recommendation
That the concept of Parental Responsibility and it's
application be extended to include persons who have demonstrated
a significant period of commitment to the safety, welfare and
support of a child in the development of talents and life chances.
That the application of this area of the law should
be a priority for review.
Background
1.1 Even if a child lives with a person who acts
as parent for a period of years this does not confer any weight
to their view or legal state of parental responsibility or indeed
any rights at all including the right to be heard in court or
be involved in mediation. As a result someone with legally recognised
parental responsibility can remove the child from a sound environment
and block contact. This was a personal experience and the solicitor's
attempt to achieve court attendance by direct appeal to the judge
was rebuffed.
The result is that a child can suffer a traumatic
transfer from a home with lots of developmental activities to
a very different environment including smokers and pub attendance.
Such a child may also have to transfer from a school with excellent
performance and behaviour to a very poorly performing school with
a vastly different cultural environment. My knowledge of a child
who went through this experience includes being told that she
became very distressed and withdrawn.
Despite Government guidelines on the importance of
a child's life chances and this point being heavily emphasised
by Harriott Harmon the result in this case was a destruction of
life chances and although the child referred to the surrogate
father as "the best daddy" he was never interviewed
with the child.
Had Government Guidelines on Life Chances been followed
and the interpretation of parental responsibility was not such
a rigid concept the result may have been different. It does seem
that systems are designed to keep things simple and convenient
for the adult administrators at the expense of serious injustice
and the production of deeply disturbed children and social misfits.
2. CAFCASS AND
CONFIDENTIALITY
Recommendation
That the full Cafcass report is more widely available
especially to solicitors representing parties with a legitimate
interest before any court action and that the Cafcass officer
involved should be in court to answer questions.
That the Cafcass report be not subject to total gagging
after proceedings.
Background
2.1 I understand from the mother who was in court
that the judge phoned the Cafcass officer, who was not in court,
for information before making any decision.
2.2 Any link between Cafcass and education was
in my experience remarkable for it's absence. (Photographs of
a happy child doing a range of educational and social activities
were dismissed as snapshots of the moment and of no worth).
2.3 Recent changes appear to have made no difference.
3. BIOLOGICAL
PARENTS
Recommendation
That the presumption that children will be better
off with their biological parents be implemented with much greater
sensitivity to the life chances of the child and to established
relationships.
Background
3.1 I have worked all my life in areas of deprivation
and have noted that biological parents who would appear entirely
unsuitable because of their drug or drink habits, associated friends
and attitudes are granted custody despite the obvious life long
disadvantages even dangers. By contrast, persons who wish to adopt
are subject to a very long and most rigorous assessment. Foster
parents can have children removed to live with the biological
parents who again seem less suitable for the child's life chances.
4. MEDIATION/PARENTAL
RESPONSIBILITY/BIRTH
CERTIFICATES
Recommendation
The question of access and other rights should be
matters for mediation outside the birth certificate process but
the mediation result must have penalties in law. The practice
of issuing birth certificates with only one parental name be discouraged
and that there be a stronger requirement for the names of both
parents.
Background
4.1 Working in areas of deprivation I have been
privy to conversations that make it very clear that there are
families and networks of women whose target is not to have a father's
name on the birth certificate. It does seem that the authorities
are mildly complicit in this matter and this should be discouraged
no matter what reasons are given for not doing so.
4.2 The father may have to pursue potentially
expensive DNA testing and court action to establish any rights
in law. This tends to be against a background of the mother supporting
simple agreement as a way forward and suggesting court action
is unnecessary. Sadly it seems simple agreements with no penalties
are often broken and I have observed that the distress to the
disenfranchised male can be personality changing and life destruction.
September 2011
|