Apologies if this is posted twice. I tried to send it yesterday when the
list was having problems and it appears not to have arrived.
I've been alerted to the following story in The Guardian which may be of
interest.
Regards,
Graham
-------
To see this story with its related links on the Guardian Unlimited site, go
to http://www.guardian.co.uk
MPs breaking law in children's cases
Intervening in custody or care cases violates disclosure rules
Michael White, political editor
Monday March 29 2004
The Guardian
Hundreds of MPs have been unwittingly breaking the law when taking up care
and custody cases involving children and local authorities on behalf of
constituents.
Though most are unaware of the legal implications, it has emerged that in
disclosing any details of a child's case - which is unavoidable when
intervening with police or social services in problems involving access,
custody or domestic violence, they are in breach of the 1989 Children Act.
The issue is now being reviewed by the law officers and the Department of
Constitutional Affairs, with a view to changing the law or clarifying
procedures in which MPs act as a "safety valve" for parents in distress.
"Family court judges are very sensitive about disclosure of details
involving children," David Kidney, a lawyer who is a Labour MP for
Stafford, said. "If they did take issue with you they would come down like
a ton of bricks."
Martin Salter, MP for Reading West, said the law needed to be updated. "If
the law prevents me taking up cases on behalf of my constituents then the
law must change." Mr Salter said he, like many MPs, had handled a dozen
such sensitive cases since 1997.
Backbench MPs on all sides acknowledged the problem after the solicitor
general, Harriet Harman, highlighted it in the Commons last week in a row
over court papers sent to her by her solicitor sister, Sarah Harman.
The case involved an unidentified mother whose daughter had been taken into
care by Kent social services who claimed she had been harming the child.
Sarah Harman, acting for the mother, forwarded the papers to her politician
sister. She believed the case was relevant to a review of Munchausen
syndrome by proxy being conducted by Margaret Hodge, the children's
minister.
The review was instigated by the court of appeal's decision to overturn
Angela Canning's murder conviction, undermining paediatrician Roy Meadows'
theory that some mothers harm their babies to gain attention.
Although Sarah Harman, unusually, deleted all the names before forwarding
the papers to her sister, she was told by a judge she had acted in contempt
of court. Had she waited for a high court ruling she would not have been
acting illegally.
Tory MPs criticised Harriet Harman for passing the papers on to Mrs Hodge.
The solicitor general refused to apologise, telling MPs she had not
breached disclosure rules.
Labour colleagues backed her and called for the situation to be clarified.
The Kent mother's custody appeal has not yet been resolved, but the wider
issue of disclosure is under review.
The children's bill, now going through parliament, seeks to increase
protection of children in the wake of the murder of Victoria Climbié.
It could be amended to protect MPs rights to act as "go-betweens or
facilitators" - without written or legal consents having to be granted.
Copyright Guardian Newspapers Limited
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
All archives of messages are stored permanently and are
available to the world wide web community at large at
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/data-protection.html
If you wish to leave this list please send the command
leave data-protection to [log in to unmask]
All user commands can be found at : -
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/help/commandref.htm
(all commands go to [log in to unmask] not the list please)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|