One of the biggest mistakes that people make in family legal situations usually has to do with taking actions such as leaving the state with the child, withholding visitation from the other parent, moving without telling the mother or father of the child etc. There are a lot of situations in which there is a moment where you have to stop what you’re doing and ask yourself, should I be doing this? What are my rights as a mother, father, grandparent or sibling? Will it be considered illegal if I take off with my son or daughter? The answers to these kinds of questions depend heavily on the circumstances of each individual situation and may in fact require the assistance of a legal professional that can advise you on your choices. Here are some tips for parents who don’t know what to do but know that…
The International Court of Justice has today upheld Australia’s bid to ban Japan’s Antarctic whaling program.
ICJ president Peter Tomka said the court concluded the scientific permits granted by Japan for its whaling program were not scientific research as defined under International Whaling Commission rules. The Court had found, by a majority of twelve votes, that Japan had conducted a program for logistical and political considerations, rather than scientific research.
This serious case review report concludes that it is very likely Callum Wilson’s death could have been prevented.
But “missed opportunities” meant the 11-month-old’s mother killed him and no one who could have done or should have done intervened to protect him.
It concludes that:
Professionals in three different settings – the GP practice, the children’s centre, and a child health clinic – did not comply with the child protection procedures and training they had received and did not report suspicious injuries to the local authority social care service.
This points the blame at key front line workers.
In the months and weeks leading to Callum’s death the report records that a social worker noticed scratches on Callum’s face on a home visit, his GP noticed bruising on his face and head, and staff at a children’s centre where his mother took him noticed scratches and bruises on him on several occasions.
But no one, the SCR reads, reported any of their concerns to the Local Authority.
The SCR concludes that the risks Callum faced were consistently underestimated, and that he should have been much more closely monitored.
It says that there are important lessons that have already been learnt about the training, skills and knowledge of individual professionals and by the teams involved about the need to better share information between agencies.
But there are issues beyond the individuals concerned, failures in the system too:
It notes that the caseloads of health visitors in the area, East Berkshire, exceeded national recommended levels, which limited the time staff had to make assessments and make visits.
One local councillor has already alleged that cuts to local services are compromising services.
Another damning conclusion is that the current arrangements for the transfer of GP records (information sharing) was “not fit for purpose” in relation to the needs of vulnerable children like Callum.
It also points out that with hindsight, another mistake was giving primary responsible for the case to a “newly qualified and inexperienced social worker” and that the “potential complexity of the case was underestimated”.
Those involved in the serious case review expressed their “sincere sympathy to those who loved Callum in his very short life”.
It states that all the recommendations have already been implemented.
Previous Reviews and Reports but the Social Services ‘Move On having learned’ and assured us it cannot happen again but…..!