Thursday, 2 September 2021

PRACTICE GUIDELINES UPDATED


https://www.familylawweek.co.uk/site.aspx?i=ed222479

Family Procedure Rules
Web Version  
Practice Direction - Practice Directions Relating to Family Proceed...
Part 1 - Overriding Objective
Part 2 - Application and Interpretation of the Rules
Practice Direction 2A - Functions of the Court in the Family Proced...
Practice Direction 2B – References in the Rules to Actions Done by ...
Practice Direction 2C – Justices’ legal adviser  
Part 3 - Non-court Dispute Resolution
Part 3A - Vulnerable persons participation in proceedings and givin...  
Practice Direction 3A - Family Mediation Information and Assessment...
Practice Direction 3AA - Vulnerable persons: participation in proce...  
Part 4 - General Case Management Powers
Practice Direction 4A - Striking Out a Statement of Case
Practice Direction 4B - Civil Restraint Orders
Part 5 - Forms, start of proceedings and communication with the court

Practice Direction 5A - Forms

Practice Direction 5B - Communication and filing of documents by e-...  
Practice Direction 5C – Communications with the court  
Part 6 - Service
Practice Direction 6A - Service Within the Jurisdiction
Practice Direction 6B - Service Out of the Jurisdiction
Practice Direction 6C - Disclosure of Addresses by Government Depar...
Part 7 - Procedure for Applications in Matrimonial and Civil Partne...
Practice Direction 7A - Procedure for Applications in Matrimonial a...
Practice Direction 7B - Medical Examinations on Applications for An...
Practice Direction 7C - Polygamous Marriages
Practice Direction 7D - The Gender Recognition Act 2004
Part 8 - Procedure for Miscellaneous Applications
Practice Direction 8A - Where to start certain proceedings
Part 9 - Applications for a Financial Remedy
Practice Direction 9A - Application for a Financial Remedy
Practice Direction 9B - Communication of information from financial...  
Part 10 - Applications under Part 4 of the Family Law Act 1996
Practice Direction 10A - Part 4 of the Family Law Act 1996
Part 11 - Applications under Part 4A of the Family Law Act 1996
Part 12 - Proceedings Relating to Children Except Parental Order Pr...
Practice Direction 12A - Care, Supervision and Other Part 4 Proceed...
Practice Direction 12B - Child Arrangements Programme
Practice Direction 12C - Service of Application in Certain Proceedi...
Practice Direction 12D - Inherent Jurisdiction (Including Wardship)...
Practice Direction 12E - Urgent Business
Practice Direction 12F - International Child Abduction
Practice Direction 12G - Communication of Information
Practice Direction 12H - Contribution Orders
Practice Direction 12I - Applications for Reporting Restriction Orders
Practice Direction 12J - Child Arrangements and Contact Order: Dome...
Practice Direction 12K - Children Act 1989: Exclusion Requirement
Practice Direction 12L - Children Act 1989:Risk Assessments under S...
Practice Direction 12M - Family Assistance Orders: Consultation
Practice Direction 12N - Enforcement of Children Act 1989 Child Arr...
Practice Direction 12O - Child: Arrival by air
Practice Direction 12P - Removal from Jurisdiction: Issue of Passports
Part 13 - Proceedings Under Section 54 of the Human Fertilisation a...
Part 14 - Procedure for Applications in Adoption, Placement and Rel...
Practice Direction 14A - Who Receives a Copy of the Application For...
Practice Direction 14B - The First Directions Hearing - Adoptions w...
Practice Direction 14C - Reports by the Adoption Agency or Local Au...
Practice Direction 14D - Reports by a Registered Medical Practition...
Practice Direction 14E - Communication of Information Relating to P...
Practice Direction 14F - Disclosing Information to an Adopted Adult
Part 15 - Representation of Protected Parties
Practice Direction 15A - Protected Parties
Practice Direction 15B - Adults Who May be Protected Parties and Ch...
Part 16 - Representation of Children and Reports in Proceedings Inv...
Practice Direction 16A - Representation of Children
Part 17 - Statements of Truth
Practice Direction 17A - Statements of Truth
Part 18 - Procedure for other Applications in Proceedings
Practice Direction 18A - Other Applications in Proceedings
Part 19 - Alternative Procedure for Applications
Practice Direction 19A - Alternative Procedure for Applications
Part 20 - Interim Remedies and Security for Costs
Practice Direction 20A - Interim Remedies
Part 21 - Miscellaneous Rules about Disclosure and Inspection of Do...
Practice Direction 21A - Disclosure and Inspection
Part 22 - Evidence
Practice Direction 22A - Written Evidence
Part 23 - Miscellaneous Rules about Evidence
Part 24 - Witnesses and depositions generally
Practice Direction 24A - Witnesses and Depositions generally
Part 25 - Experts and Assessors
Practice Direction 25A - Experts and Assessors in Family Proceedings
Practice Direction 25B - The Duties of an Expert, the Expert's Repo...
Practice Direction 25C - Children Proceedings - the Use of Single J...
Practice Direction 25D - Financial Remedy Proceedings and Other Fam...
Practice Direction 25E - Discussions Between Experts in Family Proc...
Practice Direction 25F - Assessors in Family Proceedings
Practice Direction 25G – Toxicology test evidence  
Part 26 - Change of Solicitor
Practice Direction 26A - Change of Solicitor
Part 27 - Hearings and Directions Appointments
Practice Direction 27A - Family Proceedings: Court Bundles (Univers...
Practice Direction 27B - Attendance of Media Representatives at Hea...
Part 28 - Costs
Practice Direction 28A - Costs
Part 29 - Miscellaneous
Practice Direction 29A - Human Rights, Joining the Crown
Practice Direction 29B - Human Rights Act 1998
Practice Direction 29C – Transfer of proceedings from the family co...
Practice Direction 29D – Court officers making corrections to orders  
Part 30 - Appeals
Practice Direction 30A - Appeals
Practice Direction 30B - Appeals - Transparency  
Part 31 - Registration of Orders under the Council Regulation, the ...
Practice Direction 31A - Registration of Orders under the 1996 Hagu...
Part 32 - Registration and Enforcement of Orders
Practice Direction 32A – Forms Relating to Part 32
Part 33 - Enforcement
Practice Direction 33A - Enforcement of Undertakings
Part 34 - Reciprocal Enforcement of Maintenance Orders
Practice Direction 34A - Reciprocal Enforcement of Mainenance Orders
Practice Direction 34B - Tracing Payers Overseas
Practice Direction 34C - REVOKED
Practice Direction 34D – Form Relating to Part 34
Practice Direction 34E – Reciprocal Enforcement of Maintenance Orde...
Part 35 - REVOKED
Practice Direction 35A - REVOKED
Part 36 - Transitional Arrangements and Pilot Schemes
Practice Direction 36A - Transitional Arrangements

Practice Direction 36C - Pilot Scheme: Care and Supervision Proceed...

Practice Direction 36D - Pilot scheme: procedure for using an onlin...

 
Practice Direction 36E - Pilot Scheme: Procedure for online filing ...
Practice Direction 36F - Pilot scheme - Procedure for using interve...  
Practice Direction 36G - Pilot Scheme: Procedure for using an onlin...  
Practice Direction 36H - Pilot Scheme: Procedure for service of cer...  
Practice Direction 36I – Pilot Scheme: Procedure for online filing ...  
Practice Direction 36J - Pilot Scheme: Transparency (attendance at ...  
Practice Direction 36K – Pilot Scheme: Procedure for the bulk scann...  
Practice Direction 36L - Pilot Scheme: Procedure for using an onlin...  
Practice Direction 36M - Pilot Scheme: online system for certain pu...  
Practice Direction 36N - Pilot Scheme: Procedure for online filing ...  
Practice Direction 36O - Pilot Scheme: Procedure for bulk scanning ...  
Practice Direction 36P – Pilot Scheme: Placement proceedings: proce...  
Practice Direction 36Q: Pilot provision: modification of Practice D...  
Practice Direction 36R – Pilot provision: modification of practice ...  
Practice Direction 36S – Pilot provision: announcements in open cou...  
Practice Direction 36T – Expired on 31 May 2021  
Practice Direction 36U – pilot provision: service and notification ...  
Practice Direction 36V – Pilot scheme: Family mediation voucher scheme  
Practice Direction 36W – Pilot scheme: Procedure for notification o...  
Practice Direction 36X – Pilot provision: proceeding by electronic ...  
Practice Direction 36Y – Pilot provision: temporary modification of...  
Part 37 - Applications and proceedings in relation to contempt of c...
Practice Direction 37A - Applications and Proceedings in Relation t...
Part 38 - Recognition and enforcement of protection measures

Practice Direction 38A – Recognition and Enforcement of Protection ...
Part 39 - Attachment of earnings  
Part 40 - Charging order, stop order, stop notice  
Part 40A - Charging order, stop orders, stop notices  
PART 41 - Proceeding by electronic means  
Practice Direction 41A - Proceeding by electronic means: certain pr...  
Practice Direction 41B - Proceeding by electronic means: procedure ...  
Practice Direction 41C – Proceeding by electronic means: appeals in...

No comments:

Post a Comment

DR SQUIER

THIS IS WHY YOU SHOULD NEVER AGREE TO SIGN A SECTION 20 ORDER OUT OF DURESS BY A SOCIAL WORKER

BY AGREEING TO A SECTION ORDER,YOU WILL BE PLACING YOUR CHILD INTO VOLUNTARY CARE AND FACE LOOSING YOUR BABY TO FORCED ADOPTION

Do not ever agree to sign a section 20 Order out of duress by a Social Worker.

Not only will you be agreeing to Put your Child into voluntary Care, but you will not be entitled to Public Funded Legal Aid at this time.

The Social Worker more than often will say, if you do not agree to sign a section 20 Order, will will go for an Emergency Protection Order.

If they mention an Emergency Protection Order, you will need to act very quickly, and get a Children's Panel Solicitor straight away.

Solicitors that represent PAIN Service Users have been very successful in the past in preventing the granting of an Emergency Protection Order.

Social Workers will not tell you that you can try and discharge the EPO, within 72 hours.

The Local Authority can sit on this order for quite a few weeks,AND AS I HAVE ALREADY STATED YOU WILL NOT BE ENTITLED TO PUBLIC FUNDED LEGAL AID AT THIS TIME.

If you receive a Pre Proceedings letter through the post, you must take this letter straight to a specialized Children's Panel Solicitor.

The letter will state that they are considering going for Care Proceedings, and there will be a Pre Proceedings Meeting.

At any Pre Proceedings Meeting they do not always instigate Care Proceedings.

There is sometimes an Agreement contract drawn up, for you as Parents to follow the stipulations written to in the Contract.

If you breach the Agreement, then there is a high expectation that the LA will in most cases instigate Care Proceedings.

When the LA instigate Care Proceedings, and if they go for an Emergency Protection Order, this is when Non Means Tested Public Funded Legal Aid is granted.

With the Governments CHANGE OF DIRECTION FOSTER TILL YOU ADOPT COMING INTO FORCE THREE YEARS AGO, which means Foster Carers are brought in at the early stages of Care Proceedings , or Babies are allocated to Foster Carers before they are even born, this means in a lot of Cases, a Baby will be taken from His or Her Birth Parents within minutes or a few hours after birth, via an Emergency Protection Order.

TO PUT THIS IN THE PROPER TERMS,THE PROSPECTIVE ADOPTERS WILL SEE THE BABY MORE OR LESS WITHIN A FEW HOURS OF BIRTH.

This will also be breaching the Kincare Clause by placing a Child with an immediate Family Member such as Grandparents, Aunties, Uncles, before foster care is explored.

Local Authority's have a mandatory obligation to consider using the Kincare Clause, before a Child is placed into Care, and placed with Foster Carers.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/jul/10/babies-at-risk-of-a....

DO NOT AGREE TO SIGN A SECTION 20 ORDER, YOUR LEGAL AID WILL NOT BE GRANTED AT THIS TIME.


Court can still agree children’s deprivation of liberty in placements banned by new law, says ruling

Court can still agree children’s deprivation of liberty in placements banned by new law, says ruling : The High Court will still be able to ...

Michael D Innis Shaken Baby Syndrome


I am a pathologist and a hematologist. My qualifications are MBBS (Bachelor of Medicine) University of Madras 1942; DTM&H (Diploma of Tropical Medicine) University of Liverpool; FRCPA (Fellow of the Royal College of Pathologists) 1960 (Australia); FRCPath (Fellow of the Royal College of Pathologists) 1972 (United Kingdom). I have substantial experience in hematology and have had experience in interpreting laboratory results for over 30 years. I have been a part time lecturer in Medicine at the University of Queensland and have instructed candidates appearing for Fellowship of the Royal College of Pathologists of Australasia.

[2015 Oct] Shaken Baby Syndrome or Death by Vaccine? Doctor Speaks Out…by Chri...

[2010 March Letter] MMR Toxicity Explained by Michael D Innis

[pdf] Vaccines, Apparent Life-Threatening Events, Barlow's Disease,...

[pdf] Vitamin K deficiency disease by Michael Innis MBBS

[2008] Rapid Responses to Does cot death still exist?

[March 2008 SBS letter] Child Health Safety - BMJ Stifles Debate

[BMJ Aug 2002] History repeats itself (shaken baby syndrome)

[BMJ 22 March 2002] Misdiagnosis of “Shaken Baby Syndrome” by Michael D Innis

Shaken Baby Syndrome: Pitfalls in Diagnosis and Demographics By F. ...

Innis, SM. The role of dietary n-6 and n-3 fatty acids in the developing brain. Devel Neuroscience, 2000; 22(5-6):4740480.

Quotes
My paper on “Coagulopathy mistaken for Shaken Baby Syndrome” was rejected – it recorded the case of a child given six vaccines on the same day and who was ill with fever, irritability and diarrhoea the next day and was dead three weeks later. Death was certified to be due to the Shaken Baby Syndrome on the evidence of Pathologists, Paediatricians and Radiologists when all the haematological and biochemical evidence clearly indicated death was due to a coagulopathy following hepatic insufficiency and malnutrition. [BMJ Aug 2002] History repeats itself (shaken baby syndrome)

[2010 March Letter] MMR Toxicity Explained by Michael D Innis The truth is it is harming the children because as Wakefield and his colleagues have shown, some ingredient in the vaccine causes methymalonic acidaemia followed by cobalamine deficiency and consequently neurological lesions in genetically susceptible children. The government is blind to this and one way out of this dilemma it seems is for doctors to forgo the five pieces of silver and refuse to vaccinate children on the grounds that the oath they have sworn, "first do no harm" forbids such an action.

In April 2004, Michael D. Innis, the renowned Australian pathologist-hematologist and an expert on SBS, wrote in a communication to the British Medical Journal (BMJ): ". in spite of being repeatedlychallenged to document a single authenticated case of shaken baby syndrome or shaking/impact Injury, no one has been able to do so. All they are required to do to convince judges, juries, and those of us who regard the condition as a spurious diagnosis, is present a case which:
1. was not vaccinated within 21 days of the onset of symptoms;
2. was shown to have a normal coagulation/hemostatic system;
3. had no evidence of malnutrition, and was not artificial fed or premature, since these factors predispose to fractures .
If the numerous pediatricians, ophthalmologists, radiologists and pathologists, who have given evidence in courts in the U.K., U.S. and Australia, are unable to document a single properly investigated case,there is good reason to abandon the diagnosis." Shaken Baby Syndrome And Multiple Vaccinations: An Investigation By Red Flags Columnist, F. Edward Yazbak, MD, FAAP

They will have successfully demolished my explanation if they can document a single case of Shaken Baby Syndrome or “inflicted shaking/impact injury” (as they prefer to call it), which occurred outside the 21-day period and in which a disorder of haemostasis, nutrition, or liver disease was convincingly excluded.
I repeat, the diagnosis of Shaken Baby Syndrome or inflicted shaking/impact injury is a proven figment of the imagination of some in the medical profession and should be relegated to the scrap heap of history before it causes any more shame to the profession and disaster to innocent families. Source

To prevent death following vaccination Alan Clemetson's opinion is; "There are very rare instances of severe reactions or even death following the usual infant inoculations. Although such events are rare, we need to do all we can to prevent them.
Animal observations have shown that the blood histamine concentration is increased following the injection of vaccines or toxoids and this is most likely responsible for the problems.
Vitamin C supplementation is now known to reduce the blood histamine levels; it also reduces the mortality rates following inoculations, both in animals and in man.
It is suggested that inoculations should not be given to severely debilitated infants and that supplementary vitamin C should be given in orange juice, before inoculation, to any infant with coryza, and also to any infant or adult who is to receive an unduly large number of inoculations at one time.
Moreover, vitamin C should be given by injection whenever convulsions or other untoward events occur within a day or two after vaccination or inoculation."[1] Why not try Clemetson's suggestions - out of curiosity? ----Michael D Innis, [2008] Rapid Responses to Does cot death still exist?

ELSIE SCULLY-HICKS FAILINGS

MY CASE

Inspirational women of the year: Alison's son was snatched away after she was wrongly branded a child abuser...now she fights for justice for other mothers
By Laura Topham for The Mail on Sunday
UPDATED: 08:29, 16 April 2009

View comments
The months Alison Stevens spent apart from her son still haunt her.
Twenty four years on, she cannot forget the pain she felt when social services took away her three-year-old without warning - or just cause.
Doctors should have diagnosed brittle bone disease when Alison took Scott to A&E with a broken leg. Instead, they decided he was being abused by his parents and put him in care immediately.
It took 12 long, tormented weeks for Alison and her husband, Andy, an electrician, to clear their names and win their son's return. The joy and relief they felt at having their family reunited was immeasurable. Alison was left so affected by the experience that she was determined to help other people fight similar injustices.
alison stevens
Wrongly accused: Alison Stevens
Since then, she has helped thousands of parents as the head of the national organisation Parents Against Injustice (PAIN).
'I will always remember the hurt and confusion I felt back then,' says Alison. 'It was horrendous finding Scott's hospital bed empty, then being told by nurses they thought we were to blame for his injuries. For months we had to visit him in a foster home when we desperately wanted to have him home.
'I am compelled to help other people because I understand what they are going through and how badly the system can work. This can happen to anyone and, when it does, you feel powerless.
'The toll it takes on you is indescribable - parents call me on the brink of suicide. But through PAIN I am able to help them get their children back.' While the agony still feels fresh to Alison, it was back in 1985 that her son Scott was put in care. He had been having a bath with his brother Lee, then five, when he tried to get out and slipped awkwardly, hurting his leg.
'Leaving him was like having my heart ripped out'
When Alison and Andy took Scott to hospital, doctors insisted he stay in for observation.
'Returning to the hospital that evening to visit Scott, I never suspected anything was amiss,' says Alison.
'But when we reached his bed it was empty.
'A nurse took us into a room and explained that social services had taken him away because his fracture wasn't consistent with an accident. The doctor said that we must have twisted his leg. I was distraught.'
Alison and Andy returned home, scared and confused, not knowing where Scott was and having no idea how they could get him back.
Through Yellow Pages, they discovered PAIN, a national organisation offering advice to parents wrongly accused of child abuse.
'I called them and cried down the phone,' she says.
'They were very comforting, and put me in touch with a solicitor, who specialised in child protection cases, and a doctor for a second opinion.'
The doctor asked whether Scott was small for his size and if his eyes had a blue tinge - both of which were accurate - then explained his symptoms sounded like brittle bone disease. Social services continued to refuse to let the couple know how the case was proceeding.
Then, two days later, police arrested Andy for grievous bodily harm. He was released 12 hours later due to lack of evidence. Yet it was two weeks before the family was finally told where Scott was and allowed to visit him.
An interim order granted them two hours' access, three times each week. 'His foster home was with a one parent family in a scruffy council house. It was a really rough, messy environment,' says Alison.
'When we said goodbye, Scott started screaming. He was asking why we'd sent him away and telling us he hadn't been naughty.
'Leaving him was like having my heart ripped out - I just wanted to take him home.' Alison was put in touch with a brittle bone specialist by PAIN as well as another family whose sons had been taken away in similar circumstances.
Then, three months after Scott had been removed, their solicitor called and said social services had admitted it could have been accidental. The following day, Scott was returned to his parents. 'It was wonderful having Scott back, but he was a changed child,' says Alison.
'In the past month, I've had three families reunited. That's the best news you can ever hear.'
'He was constantly angry, used terrible language and wanted everything straightaway.
'He had clearly grown used to having no discipline, and it took three years before he returned to the little boy we had known. And he still thought he'd been naughty, which was heart-breaking.'
But it wasn't only Scott who was left affected - Alison developed the inflammatory disorder Crohn's disease six weeks after Scott was taken, which she puts down to the stress she suffered as a result of losing her little boy. 'The worry was so bad it left me with health problems,' says Alison.
'Since then, I've had depression, a hiatus hernia and inflammatory bowel disease.'
The family waited a year for an appointment with the brittle bone specialist, who swiftly diagnosed the disease.
Yet Alison's experience left her wanting to help other parents, so she set up a support group in Leicester and started working with PAIN, looking after the Midlands and Yorkshire.
In 2002, the Department of Health - which had paid for three full-time paid workers - stopped funding PAIN and the organisation was forced to close.
But Alison was determined to reopen it and took over running it on a voluntary basis, in addition to her full-time work as a hospital nurse. She is now helped by two other people. Alison's achievements have been remarkable.
It was PAIN that pushed for the Parents Allowed in Case Conference Bill in the Nineties. This month, her three-year campaign with John Hemming MP to open up family courts will pay off, as journalists and charity representatives such as herself are finally allowed to attend case conferences, enabling greater public scrutiny of procedures.
She is trying to change the situation for enhanced CRB (Criminal Records Bureau) checks because any allegation remains on a person's file, even if social services take no action - 17,000 people are affected by this. But while Alison is proud of these campaigns, it is her day-to-day work with parents - 'Just being there to listen' - that remains most important to her.
'Just looking at my little granddaughter spurs me on.'
'When someone is in that situation, they want to talk to someone who can empathise,' she says.
'Last week, one woman who called was incredibly upset and, after speaking to me, said she had been thinking of suicide.
'In the past month, I've had three families reunited. That's the best news you can ever hear.'
Alison takes ten phone calls a day and responds to countless emails and messages asking for advice and guidance.
She regularly attends case conferences and court with parents. Fitting in this huge workload around full-time nursing is difficult.
Even on holiday in Egypt two months ago, Alison found an internet cafe and dealt with inquiries - though she still had 300 emails when she returned home. She feels indebted to the group.
'Without it, I might not have won back my son,' she says.
'Today, Scott is 27 and has his own baby daughter, Holly. Just looking at my little granddaughter spurs me on.'


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1170370/Inspirational-women-Alison-wrongly-branded-child-abuser-fights-justice-others.html#ixzz4xDxKBtuk

PAIN DATA PROTECTION LETTER 2

PAIN BRITTLE BONE LEAFLET

PAIN ADVICE LEAFLET

PAIN CASE CONFERENCE NOTES

MY CASE

PAIN MISSION STATEMENT