Substituting the voice of the child with one’s own shows why poking oneself in the eye in public is not a very good idea, especially not in the land of the blind, where one eye rules.
Very rare application this, and one that should interest both professionals and parents alike. It also raises important issues about the fine detail in the construction of a Position Statement at an interim hearing, particularly for lawyers representing the child.
QS v RS & Another 2016
This was a case in the High Court before MacDonald J involving international adoption – two people had adopted a child in Nepal, the girl now being ten years old and her ‘parents’ were British citizens. (I’ll drop the air-quotes from here on to keep it simple). Her parents moved with her to Dubai, and applied for British Citizenship and obtained that for her. The parents later split up and there was an argument as to whether the child should stay in Dubai with father, or be in England with mother. So it isn’t a run-of-the-mill care case, but some of the general…
View original post 5,345 more words