xs
This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Learn more

#1801 - Parental Rights And Responsibilities Being Given To Those Who Are Not Parents - Family Law

Notice: PDF Preview
The following is a more accessible plain text extract of the PDF sample above, taken from our Family Law Notes. Due to the challenges of extracting text from PDFs, it will have odd formatting.
See Original

Who has parental responsibility?

1. Mothers

  • All mothers have parental responsibility

  • Herring: The rule that all mother’s automatically have parental responsibility can be explained by the fact they’ve gone through the birth process and pregnancy

    • Her demonstration to the child through pregnancy and acceptance of caring for the child after birth,

      • Means that it’s in the child’s best interests for her to have parental responsibility

2. Genetic (or those relying on a presumption of genetic parenthood) Fathers if....

  • CA 1989 s.2: He is married to the mother

  • CA 1989 s.4: He is registered as the father of the child on the birth certificate

    • Or he enters into a parental responsibility agreement with the mother

  • CA 1989 s.4: He obtains a parental responsibility order from the court

  • CA 1989 s.12(2): He has been granted a residence order

  • CA 1989 s.5(6): He has been appointed to be Guardian

  • He has adopted the child

3. Non Parents (but they don’t necessarily get all the rights or responsibilities that flow from being a legal parent)

  • CA s.5(6) Guardians

    • Who can be appointed by a parent

      • Where a residence order is made in favour of one parent, and that parents dies having appointed G

        • G will have his guardianship take effect on the death of the parent with the residence order –

          • even if another parent is still alive and has parental responsibility

      • Where there is no residence order, and a parent dies after appointing a guardian

        • Then the guardianship does not come in to effect until the other parent with parental responsibility dies

    • OR s.5(2) by the court

      • If there is no other parent with parental responsibility, then the court can appoint a guardian

        • Even if other guardians have already been appointed (but they are either unwilling or unsuitable to carry out the role)

      • However, the exception is that the courts can appoint even if there is an extant person with parental responsibility if the dead parent carried a residence order.

    • In deciding to appoint, the best interests of the child is the paramount consideration

      • Although there is no need to do the checklist of s.1(3) here.

  • Someone who obtains a residence order in favour of the child

    • Non-parents can’t apply for parental responsibility separately – but they do get it if they’re conferred with a residence order

      • Herring: Arguably that they should have wider powers than this

        • Re WB (Residence Order)

      • Do try and get round this with willingness to grant shared residence orders

        • Re A (A Child)

4. Local Authorities

  • LAs acquire parental responsibility if:

    • They obtain a care order

    • They obtain an emergency protection

People who do not get parental responsibility automatically, but may have some rights towards a particular child

Foster Parents

  • The foster parent does not get parental responsibility automatically. However, per s.3(5) CA 1989:

    • (1) A person who

      • (a) does not have parental responsibility for a particular child;

      • BUT (b) has care of the child

    • May (subject to the Provisions of the is Act, do what is reasonable in the circumstances of the case for the purpose of safe-guarding or promoting the child’s welfare

  • But after a year, they can apply for a residence order until the child has been in their care for three years.

Relatives

  • S.105 CA 1989 – Relatives include:

    • A grandparent, brother, sister, uncle or aunt (whether of the full blood or half blood or by affinity) or step-parent

  • What legal rights to relatives have?

    • They also benefit from s.3(5) CA 1989 if the child is in their care

    • They do not automatically get parental responsibility

      • BUT If the child has lived with them for a year, or with consent of the parents, relatives can apply for a s.8 residence order w/o need for leave of the court

        • Even if the child hasn’t lived with the relative for the year, they can still apply but need leave of the court

      • However, a relative is unlikely to be successful unless the parents consent or else are clearly unsuitable for the child

        • Re D (Care: Natural Parent Presumption) = despite F’s drug problem history and his many children with other women, court preferred him to the grandparents for residence.

        • Re H (Residence: Grandparents) – Gs who had cared for a child for six years were granted a residence order, despite M’s objections – there was a very strong relationship between Gs and the child.

    • They may have a stronger chance with contact, however

      • Re A: (S.8 order: Grandparent Application) G wanted contact with her young grandchildren after a bitter divorce.

        • CoA

          • While there is a presumption in favour of contact with parents, there is no such presumption in favour of grandparents

            • The relationship between G and child must be close and strong, and likely to benefit the child.

      • G v Kirkless MBC – Siblings have a strong right to contact, but more distant relatives less so.

    • What if the child is in care?

      • If the child is care, relatives will have a stronger case for contact

        • LAs, when kids are in care, have a duty to promote contact with the wider family

        • Re M (Contact: Grandmother’s application for leave) – order for reasonable contact between G and child –

          • CoA: G play a special place in any child’s affections. LA has burden of proof in proving why contact should not go ahead

        • Re W (A Child) (Contact: Leave to Apply)

          • Wilson J

            • The question of whether there is a presumption of contact between G and children needs to be reconsidered.

      • And before care, LA is under an obligation to consider placing a child with relatives before taking them into care

        • Re K – failure to consider extended family and not consult them before adoption was a serious flaw in procedure

        • BUT Re R (Adoption: Disclosure) – relatives should not be informed of potential adoption of newborn baby if M has asked the birth be kept confidential.

  • Should relatives have legal rights?

    • Why we might want to give them something formal

      • This argument is particularly made in favour of grandparents, which studies show that most children hold their grandparents in special affection

        • Grandparents are often also a source of easy child care – over women in paid work got the grandparents to care for children under-five

        • Where a child is disabled, there may be an even bigger role

      • Merrick: When parents divorce, the paternal grandparents often lose contact with their grandchildren

        • And therefore suffer depression as a result

        • We might therefore want to give grandparents a special legal status to give them some rights

    • Why we might not want to give them something

      • Kaganas and Piper: Giving grandparents rights may give them rights without the attendant responsibilities

      • Crook: Might also impinge on parents being able to raise their children as they wish

      • Douglas and Freeman: Giving grandparents rights would work against the norms that generally govern the relationship between grandparents, their children and grandchildren

        • The norm of non-interference is prevalent – that grandparents support and assist, but don’t interfere in the parental role.

        • No reciprocal idea – grandparents don’t expect anything back.


When will the court grant s.4 Applications?

Factors to take into account:

  • The Tripartite Test

    • Re H (Parental Responsibility):

      • 1. The degree of commitment which the father has shown towards the child

      • 2. The degree of attachment which exists between the father and child

      • 3. The reasons the father is applying for the order

    • Re C: (Minors)

      • Mustill LJ

        • Was the association between the parties sufficiently enduring, and has F by his conduct during and since the application shown sufficient commitment

          • To justify giving F a legal status equivalent to that he would have enjoyed if the parties were married?

  • Previous contact and commitment

    • Re S

      • Butler Sloss P

        • F who has shown real commitment to the child concerned and to whom there is a positive attachment,

          • as well as a genuine bona fides reason for the application, ought, in a case such as the present,

            • to assume the weight of those duties and cement that the commitment and attachment by sharing the responsibilities for the child with M.

  • The child’s views and reaction to the application failing

    • Re C and V

      • Ward LJ

        • It was good for a child’s sense of self esteem that the child thought positively about an absent parent

          • So wherever possible the law should confer on a concerned father that he has that stamp of approval

            • Because he has shown himself willing and anxious to pick up the responsibility of fatherhood and not to deny or avoid it.

    • Re S (A Minor)(Parental Responsibility):

      • Ward LJ

        • Psychiatrists say how important it is that children grow up with good self-esteem and how much they need to have a favourable positive image of the absent parent.

        • Therefore the law should ensure it confers upon a committed father that stamp of approval,

          • lest the child grow up with some belief that he is in some way disqualified from fulfilling his role

          • the reason for the disqualification is something inherent which will be inherited by the child,

            • making her struggle to find her own identity all the more fraught

  • Concerns about misuse of the order

    • Re S (A Minor)(Parental Responsibility):

      • Ward LJ

        • There is all too frequently a failure to appreciate that the wide exercise of s 8 orders can control the abuse, if any,

          • of the exercise of parental responsibility which is adverse to the welfare of the child.

          • Those interferences with the day-to-day management of the child's life have nothing to do with whether or not this order should be...

Unlock the full document,
purchase it now!
Family Law