header-logo header-logo

A social panacea?

09 April 2009 / Finola Moss
Issue: 7364 / Categories: Features , Child law , Family
printer mail-detail

Finola Moss asks whether the Adoption Act 2002 is a step too far

* * * * * *

The Adoption Act 1926 was a response to a pressing social need for child protection and the formalisation of adoption. Legislation introducing the concept of transplanting a child for ever into a new family had been stalled for a long time, because of the abhorrence of the common law to the alienation of a parent's right to their children. An adoption still required a mentally competent parent's consent. Fifty years later, the Adoption Act 1976 allowed an adoption if such consent was being unreasonably withheld.

The Adoption and Children Act 2002 (ACA 2002) would provide expeditious adoptions for children in care with forever families. It placed a child's needs at the centre of the adoption process, aligning adoption law with the welfare principle in the Children Act 1989 (ChA 1989), dispensing with a parent's consent if thought necessary in the child's welfare. The once hallowed, inalienable common law right became silently subsumed and overridden

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
back-to-top-scroll