Tuesday, June 12, 2012

News Update: 12th June 2012


WELCOME to the first Family Lore News Update. These updates will keep readers informed of the most important new items appearing on Family Lore Focus, but may also add extra information, links and commentary to those items. In addition, there may be the odd items that do not appear in Family Lore Focus, for whatever reason.

NEWS
Church of England warning on gay marriage
Government proposals for gay marriage would dilute an institution "vastly" important to a healthy society, the Church of England has warned. Full story: BBC News.The warning comes in the Church's response to the Government's Equal civil marriage consultation. The full response can be found here, and a press release, here. One of the arguments raised in the response is that "if the proposal to redefine marriage were to be implemented, it must be very doubtful whether limiting same-sex couples to non-religious forms and ceremonies could withstand a challenge under the European Convention on Human Rights", a point discussed in this post on the UK Human Rights Blog.

New support programme for children affected by family breakdown launches this week
a kidspace, a new support programme for children affected by family breakdown, is launched this week. Full story: Family Law Week.

Councils back troubled families scheme
Every eligible council in England is to take part in the government's programme to tackle the problems of "troubled families", ministers have said. Full story: BBC News.

STATUTORY INSTRUMENT
The Family Procedure (Amendment) (No.2) Rules 2012
These rules amend rule 31.17 of the Family Procedure Rules 2010 to give the court a discretion to permit urgent enforcement where necessary to secure a child’s welfare notwithstanding the general position that enforcement is suspended pending expiry of relevant appeal periods. The rules can be found here.

ARTICLE
Opportunity knocks
Geraldine Morris advises a cautious approach to clean-break orders. Full article: New Law Journal.

BLOGS
Two posts each from Marilyn Stowe and Pink Tape:

A Very Private Divorce?
"The popularity of Twitter, and the apparently compulsive desire by some to give a real-time account of a floundering marriage to millions of strangers, has left me thinking about privacy, the divorce process and what happens when a divorce is played out in the public domain", says Marilyn Stowe. Full post: Marilyn Stowe Blog.

Also on the Marilyn Stowe Blog, guest poster Lindsey Randall examines the case of Aspden v Elvy, in rather more detail than I did.

Party Animals
Family barrister and blogger Stephen Twist writes a guest post asking the interesting question whether now is the right time to withdraw party status from parents in private law children disputes. He says:
"I envisage a system where, when an issue arises in relation to the care or management of a child, the court is notified, and decides if a ‘children’s guardian’ should be appointed. This first step would be the norm, and the guardian would mediate between the parties, aiming for the middle ground that is so often adored by judges. Where agreement was not possible, the guardian’s solicitor, owing an equal duty to the child and the court, would take over the whole case management. One of their tasks would be to obtain statements from the parents setting out their concerns, positions and requests. Like any other witness, the parents /grandparents /extended family members would remain witnesses, having a right to have their voice heard but not to manage and control the case."
Full post: Pink Tape.

Finally, Lucy Reed risks her career with:

Kamikaze – you’re all thinking it, but I’ll say it out loud
... in which she explains why 26 weeks. Will. Never. Work. Full post: Pink Tape.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Thank you for taking the time to comment on this post. Constructive comments are always welcome, even if they do not coincide with my views! Please note, however, that comments will be removed or not published if I consider that:
* They are not relevant to the subject of this post; or
* They are (or are possibly) defamatory; or
* They breach court reporting rules; or
* They contain derogatory, abusive or threatening language; or
* They contain 'spam' advertisements (including links to any commercial websites).
Please also note that I am unable to give advice.

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.