The Suspected Inflicted Head Injury Service could be in breach of Art 6 & 8 rights, argues Max Konarek
- Family lawyers have raised serious concerns about the Suspected Inflicted Head Injury Service (SIHIS), which is already being piloted.
- This article argues the service may be in breach of parties’ Art 6 and 8 rights in care proceedings, and that it needs more consultation and transparency.
Picture the scenario: pre fact-finding hearing in care proceedings, your client is alleged to have caused serious harm to a child. That harm includes what is said to be a non-accidental head injury—all medical experts instructed in your case are against your client in the reports they have written. No wiggle room arises from the experts’ meeting that has taken place. If anything, the experts’ views have solidified further against your client. Many would say: ‘Game over. The outcome is inevitable.’ I would say everything is to play for. But why?
The cross examination of medical experts in these cases by specialist and highly
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=e3c4b2f1_1)
