Ruling overturned at London’s Appeal Court'
 |
||
| 'Ruling has now been overturned at
London’s Appeal Court' November 05 2005 Source: Oldham Advertiser AN Oldham couple have got a second chance to prove they were not responsible for the brain damage which could wreck their son’s life – and claim him back from care. A judge ruled in April that one of the parents had caused "non-accidental" injuries to the baby, who was taken to hospital within a few days of his birth in November last year. However, that ruling has now been overturned at London’s Appeal Court, where three top judges said the couple should be given the chance to present their own expert evidence in a bid to prove that their son’s injuries had been of "innocent origin". Oldham Council had launched a court bid to have the youngster taken into care and Judge Newton accepted in April that the boy – referred to only as "K" – had suffered deliberate injuries. Judge Newton, who heard the original case, said the baby had probably suffered "a single shaking episode involving impact with considerable force being applied to the brain". After condemning both parents as "unsatisfactory" witnesses, the judge said the baby’s injuries had been caused by one of them, although it was impossible to say which. The child’s injuries were so grave he is likely to have a lifelong neurological problem, affecting his concentration and learning abilities. But, at this week’s appeal, Lord Justice Wall said the couple’s lawyers were now in a position to put forward evidence from a "highly respected" expert who "expresses a clear and fundamental disagreement" with the expert who testified for Oldham Council at the original hearing. Whilst the council expert was convinced the baby’s injuries were non-accidental, the parents’ expert is equally sure that the injuries were of innocent origin. Lord Justice Wall, sitting with Lord Justice Thorpe and Mrs Justice Black, said Judge Newton had given a model judgement and could in no way be criticised. However, in giving important guidance on how future cases should be handled, the appeal judge said the parents had been entitled to a second opinion before their son was taken into care. Overturning Judge Newton’s decision, Lord Justice Wall ordered a re-hearing of Oldham’s care application before a different judge. At the re-hearing, the parents will be able to present any expert evidence they have that may show they were not responsible for their baby’s injuries. Child at risk had ‘serious’ injuries November 05 2005 Source: Oldham Advertiser CHILD protection agencies in Oldham have been handed an urgent 16-point improvement plan after a boy identified as being “at risk” suffered serious injuries. The need for drastic improvements by the Area Child Protection Committee (ACPC) has been identified following an investigation by the Serious Case Review Panel. The panel was called in when the child – on the ‘neglect’ list of the borough’s child protection register – was admitted to hospital and a series of “old” injuries were found. He had suffered the injuries despite being under near-daily surveillance for six months from health visitors, social workers, police officers and probation staff. The child, who cannot be identified, is thought to have since been taken into foster care. A report from the review panel states the case shows “numerous situations and incidents... that should have been subject to more detailed cross-agency discussion”. This came after it was found some workers had identified problems but not discussed them with members of the other agencies. The independent panel – made up of representatives from the NSPCC, police, pupil welfare, probation and children’s services, as well as a GP and nurse – has also made detailed recommendations to safeguard children in the future. These include:- Better liaison with health visitors. Quicker response times once a child is placed on the register. Clearer skills, roles, responsibilities, guidance and training. Improved guidance and involvement for police officers and community drug workers. Better record keeping on all case decisions and consultations. Jane Donaldson, assistant director for children’s services and chairman of Oldham’s ACPC, said: “The review has shown that there are always lessons to be learned from agencies working together and we are determined to learn them. The review also highlighted very good practice. “This is a case which highlights some of the difficulties of working in the field of child protection, with families who do not want the involvement of the various agencies and who may go to some lengths to avoid their intervention.” Oldham’s ACPC dealt with 116 cases of youths with complex issues placed on the child protection register between April and October this year. In addition, social services dealt with 1,026 other children identified as requiring assistance – including children with disabilities or health problems, those in care, those acting as young carers, children of asylum seekers and refugees, and those in families categorised as needing extra support. |
||
|
Go Back |
||