Learn
more about family courts | Write to your MP | Share your experiences
When hospital staff pulled the curtains around her son’s bed and asked: “Poor
little baby. What have you been doing?”, Victoria Ward knew something was
suddenly very wrong.
A week earlier the Ward family, who live in Cambridge, had been at the height
of their happiness. According to Victoria, they both had “good jobs, a
secure marriage, a wonderful house and a three-month-old baby we had been
planning, hoping for, wanting. Life was lovely”.
With little William’s arrival, Victoria, now a baby-yoga teacher, threw
herself into all the activities middle-class mothers love: swimming,
massage, baby cinema. And when William had a restless night, Victoria, ever
the careful mum, took him to the GP, not once but on three consecutive days
until a doctor agreed that his leg looked swollen and sent the family to
hospital for an explanation.
Victoria, 34, and Jake, 35, sensible, professional people from supportive and
stable families, are the last couple you could imagine being accused of
child abuse. But in 2005, after William’s leg was x-rayed in hospital and
found to have an unexplained fracture, that’s exactly what they were
suspected of.
Out of the blue, they faced a police investigation and the terrifying threat
of their son being taken into care. Victoria’s parents had to move from
Devon to live with them round the clock before they were allowed to take
William home from hospital. Then began an 18-month nightmare encompassing
parental assessments, endless reports from social workers and doctors and
finally a court case.
In cases of child abuse, the fate of families can turn on the evidence of
doctors prepared to stand up as “expert witnesses” (often charging hundreds
of pounds an hour) and give their opinion on whether or not a parent has
harmed a child. In the criminal courts the evidence can lead to a mother or
father being jailed. In the family courts – held in secret – a child can be
taken away from its parents and fostered or adopted.
Child protection is a controversial area, and in recent years some of the
worst miscarriages of British justice have followed the testimony of
so-called expert witnesses in the field, a number of whom have been accused
of being zealots or just plain wrong in their willingness to blame parents –
even those who protest their innocence – for children’s injuries.
The conviction of the solicitor Sally Clark, jailed in 1999 after being
wrongly convicted of murdering two of her children, was based on the
evidence of Professor Sir Roy Meadow, who famously and – it later turned out
– inaccurately testified that the chance of two of her babies having
suffered cot death was one in 73m.
Clark, 42, was freed on appeal in 2003 but never recovered, and died of acute
alcohol intoxication at her home in March. Angela Cannings was another
innocent mother wrongly convicted of murdering her child during a trial at
which Meadow also gave evidence. She too was cleared by the Court of Appeal.
Last week Professor David Southall, who has been described both as Meadow’s
pro-tégé and as a pioneer in the detection of child abuse, was struck off
the medical register by the General Medical Council (GMC). It ruled that he
had abused his position by suggesting to Mandy Morris that she had drugged
and murdered her 10-year-old son Lee. The child, who had been bullied at
school, had in fact hanged himself from the curtain rail.
The GMC said Southall had “deep-seated attitudinal problems”. Yet, far from
apologising to those whose lives have been wrecked, the paediatrician struck
a defiant note when he appeared on Radio 4’s Today programme.
He was, he said, “an expert in life-threatening child abuse” and a victim of a
vindictive campaign against doctors trying to protect children. “I am the
expert and I know what I am talking about,” he insisted.
Compared with Clark and Cannings, Victoria and Jake Ward were “lucky”. After a
seven-hour wait in a police cell and interview room, where they were
interrogated on suspicion of GBH and child cruelty, the police dropped the
case.
The county council, however, carried on with childcare proceedings. By the
time the hearings started, Victoria – then pregnant with her daughter
Hattie, who is now nine months old – knew her second child was also at risk
of being taken away if the court found, “on the balance of probabilities”,
that the couple had harmed their son.
But, rack their brains as they might, their only explanation for how William
could have fractured his leg was that he might have trapped it at night
between the cot bars and caused the injury in trying to wriggle free.
Over 10 months, Victoria, Jake and William visited no fewer than three expert
witnesses – the judge wanted to hear a range of opinion. Finally, after a
two-week hearing involving conflicting evidence from the experts, the couple
were exonerated. “There is no cogent evidence that these parents injured
their son,” the judge concluded.
Now Victoria, who kept a video diary of the experience, is pressing ahead with
a legal battle to be allowed to name the experts who gave evidence. Like
many parents caught up in the trauma of trying to prove they have not harmed
their children, she and Jake have found the secrecy of the family courts
deeply disturbing. They believe it makes it difficult to right miscarriages
of justice and hinders research into real medical conditions that may
explain fractures and other injuries in babies.
“I thought there had been a trend towards greater openness in the family
courts after the miscarriages of justice of Sally Clark and Angela Cannings,
and that I would be able to speak out and tell my story. But it is
incredibly difficult,” she says.
During the hearing, she attended a support group for parents of children with
unexplained fractures and discovered that although parents are not allowed
to discuss cases in the family courts many of the same names came up again
and again.
“There seems to be a small group of expert witnesses who often condemn
parents,” she says. In fact she had been told by the support group that she
would lose the case, “because families always lose”.
“One family we knew of did lose their child,” she says. “It was a similar
case, a child under six months with a broken arm, but it went the other way.
Their daughter was adopted a couple of weeks ago.”
The Wards feel social workers and doctors should never assume that if a child
has broken bones and the parents don’t know why, that it is inevitably
because of child abuse.
“Social workers told me that most broken bones in children under one are
caused by child abuse,” Victoria says. “I feel very strongly that just
because you cannot explain how something happened, someone cannot just say:
‘Oh well, the parents must have done it.’ That assumption has to change. We
are very keen to speak up against that crazy [idea].
“One of the expert witnesses in our case was very helpful in terms of
supporting an alternative view of how this fracture was caused. I want him
to be able to be named. Research needs to go on into children with
unexplained fractures.
“We are not saying the doctors in our case have done anything wrong, yet they
are seeking anonymity. There is a risk there could be hundreds of Dr
Southalls out there giving evidence in the family courts, and no one will
know anything about it.”
The solicitor Sarah Harman, sister of the deputy prime minister, Harriet
Harman, agrees. She dismisses the objection raised by the Royal College of
Paediatrics and Child Health last week that doctors will be deterred from
undertaking child protection work and that “children may come to harm”
as a result.
“When the chief medical officer did research into expert witnesses, he found
that many doctors had simply not been asked to do this work. There is a
small group of people who do expert-witness work. They earn a large amount
of money. We need to widen the pool.
“There is no western democracy that has such family-court secrecy as we do,”
adds Harman, who says she is giving up child protection work because the
secrecy compromises parents. “The Wards are my last [such] case,” she says.
Next May, in front of a High Court judge, the Wards will argue for the right
to name names. Victoria and Jake’s lives have changed a lot in the past two
years. Neither she nor her husband still works in the job they had when
William was injured, they are pursuing a case for compensation and their
faith in the justice system has been severely tested.
Even now, they worry about what would happen if either of their children hurt
themselves again. “We have had to force ourselves to let William climb and
play outside and take risks like normal children,” says Victoria. “What
happened is still on his record.”
But at least if Mr Justice Munby gives them the go-ahead next year they will
be able to draw some comfort from the fact that their case may stand as a
landmark ruling, prising open the secrecy of the family courts and perhaps
helping families who find themselves caught up in a similar predicament.
In the meantime, Southall says he may appeal against the GMC’s decision.
Inquiries by the police and the attorney-general into his work are
continuing.
The whole notion that social workers do mainly good must surely now be questioned. The Family Court system, with its secrecy and many other failings, has caused untold suffering and injustice. Furthermore, we should not forget the scandal a few years ago when hundreds of children were taken away from their parents, some for more than two years, due to the parents being accused of satanic abuse. In EVERY single case the parents were found to be innocent. Just imagine the trauma the children went through. It wasn't just in Scotland, dozens of local authorities across England made the same accusations simply because a video of the dangers of satanic abuse, made in the USA, was circulated to social workers. It beggars belief that even one such accusation was ever taken seriously. Where involved, the police quickly dropped all charges, but the children concerned were kept away from their parents for months and in some cases years after. Just imagine what those families went through....
Robert Matthews, Ealing, London
1:- Why do family courts gag parents forbidding them to reveal details of proceedings after they have had their children taken for forced adoption by family courts?
Surely the right to protest against a perceived injustice is fundamental in any democratic country.?
2 A minister admitted in parliament that family courts imprison more than 200 parents every year with no public hearing ! Surely prison sentences ,often for as long as 2 years, without public trial should happen only in
dictatorships not in a democracy such as the UK?.
3:-Why do family courts take children and newborn babies for adoption just because a hired "expert" makes a "prediction" that one day in the future there may be a "risk of emotional harm from their parents.? Parents (and their children) are punished not for anything they have done but for something some "expert" thinks they might do in the future! How can this be justice?
4:-Why are mothers faced with loss of their children for life refused a jury ?
ian josephs, monte carlo, monaco
The same destructive process is occurring here in the U.S. As a physician I am shocked to see how, of all fields, the field of child abuse appears to be practicing medicine in the dark ages. The science behind their statements is very poor or sadly lacking, and they continue to ignore decades of new science that currently contradicts many of their beliefs. It is tragic to see the public become so distrustful of their doctors. I once read that this period of time would become the saddest in pediatric medicine history. It is a time when child abuse became nothing more than a witch hunt. I hate to read these stories, because it always brings these words back to me.
Pediatric Radiologist, Stanford, CA, USA
I am so pleased to see The Wards are pursuing this case, My partner and I recently found our selves in the same position, our 11 week old son had a fracture to his leg and the only explaination we can think is that it was done at birth as he was delivered by breech c-section. Yet because of these so called experts and their opinions they say the fracture was done at 6 weeks and nothing we say will change that. We even have a picture of the baby after birth showing thhat something is clearly wrong but the doctors have denied that. There is no justice system in these days. Why do they not chase up the people that really do harm their children and leave the ones that love and care alone.
anon, Snodland, kent
We had personal experience of a Child Psychiatrist who could only look for some sort of abuse as the explanation for our son's symptoms. We were made to feel guilty, inadequate parents by the attitude of this so called child expert, who was quite appaling to deal with. I feel sure had it not been for the fact that out daughter was "normal", the Psychiatrist would have found us to be responsible in some way for his condition.
We finally found a Paediatrician who correctly diagnosed our son's condition as a genetic disorder affecting his brain. We never received any acknowledement, let alone an apology from the Psychiatrist for her errors of judgement. These paople can behave like little tin gods - never wrong, always superior and totally dogmatic. These so-called "professionals" should be ashamed of themselves.
Mike Blomeley, Burnley, UK
Today we were in Manchester court, for what we thought was the adoption hearing for my granddaughter, we have opposed this, and we have medical grounds, but Social Services dared to laugh and thought the evidence 'rubbish', our forensic witness is outraged and offended by this. Social Services and the Guardian assume that they know better than anyone else, who in God's name do they think they are, how absolutely infuriating. We are gagged for secrecy right now, I wonder why, but one day, and may that be very soon, these evil people will
be punished for their wrong doings. We know Victoria and are members of the same support group, our day will come.
Beverly Walker, Stockport, UK
After being told by all the legal and child protection "experts" that rapists have the right to take their victim to court for parental "rights" to the child born as a result of rape, and suffering seven years of secret Family Court Hell, I think that the lifting of the shroud of secrecy can only be a good thing.
Rape Survivor, Staffordshire, England
1:- Why do family courts gag parents forbidding them to reveal details of proceedings after they have had their children taken for forced adoption by family courts?
Surely the right to protest against a perceived injustice is fundamental in any democratic country.?
2 A minister admitted in parliament that family courts imprison more than 200 parents every year with no public hearing ! Surely prison sentences ,often for as long as 2 years, without public trial should happen only in
dictatorships not in a democracy such as the UK?.
3:-Why do family courts take children and newborn babies for adoption just because a hired "expert" makes a "prediction" that one day in the future there may be a "risk of emotional harm from their parents.? Parents (and their children) are punished not for anything they have done but for something some "expert" thinks they might do in the future! How can this be justice?
4;- A burglar facing 6 months or more in prison can demand a jury so why should a jury be denied to parents who risk losing their children for life? Few juries would take babies for adoption by strangers just because an "expert" said there was a "risk of emotional abuse" .Records show however that family court judges play safe and nearly always "go along" with social services no matter what the parents say.How can it be fair or just to allow a jury to hardened criminals but refuse one to a loving mother who only seeks to care for her own children?
The 4 obvious reforms would be:-
1;- Remove the gag from parents involved in family court proceedings
2:-Forbid judges in the family courts to imprison any parent without a public hearing.
3:-Abolish "risk" as a reason to remove children from a sane parent unless in addition to risk it can be clearly shown and proved that such children have already suffered significant physical harm.
4:-Any parents facing the possibility that their children could be removed for long term fostering or adoption without parental consent should have the right to demand that the final decision be made by a jury not a judge.
ian josephs, monte carlo, monaco
1- Why do family courts gag parents forbidding them to reveal details of proceedings after they have had their children taken for forced adoption by family courts?
Surely the right to protest against a perceived injustice is fundamental in any democratic country.?
2 A minister admitted in parliament that family courts imprison more than 200 parents every year with no public hearing ! Surely prison sentences ,often for as long as 2 years, without public trial should happen only in
dictatorships not in a democracy such as the UK?.
3:-Why do family courts take children and newborn babies for adoption just because a hired "expert" makes a "prediction" that one day in the future there may be a "risk of emotional harm from their parents.? Parents (and their children) are punished not for anything they have done but for something some "expert" thinks they might do in the future! How can this be justice?
4;- A burglar facing 6 months or more in prison can demand a jury so why should
ian josephs, monte carlo, monaco
People who support 'secrecy' have something to hide:
- the Judiciary
- the so-called experts
- the family lawyers
Family Courts are neither democratic nor liberal but totalitarian and dictatorial.
Britain's Judiciary are an International embarrassment.
One has only to read the few public cases that come before the Court of Appeal to understand what foolish, unintelligent and uneducated decisions are made by Family Judges:
- a parents rights denied ignoring the child's overriding right when it is the same
- ignoring the Spirit of the Law
- imposing personal values instead of reflecting societal norms
- ignoring all principles of Common Law and Justice
The Office of the President is a total waste of public money:
- handing out 'Family Tickets' to Judges just because they are willing
-making rules that are ignored without sanction by many Judges
-failure to take any disciplinary action against Judges
UK Judges are only qualified as lawyers which is why Juries make better judgements
Ian Julian, Lowestoft,
My heart goes out to the Ward family.
As a Paternal Grandparent caught up (albeit on the sidelines) in a prolonged contact dispute (lasting 2 years now) after tyhe heartbreak of a messy divorce. The secret Family Court system has allowed the situation where our family has been effectively prevented from seeing our Granddaughter simply by an application by the Resident parent to the court.
We simply must get some accountablity into the Family Justice System where incompentance reigns aided and abetted by the CAFCASS agency supposedly acting in the best interests of the child with "the paramountcy principle of the welfare of the child" being used to cover all sorts of injustices.
Grandfather, Cleveland
George Rutter, Middlesbrough, England
Alain Williams is right; more right than most know.
First, nine out of ten investigated families are exonerated by the courts - but not before all members of each family are harassed by the SS and both themselves treated as suspects (often forced from their homes) and continued as such after the courts have supposedly declared innocent (the SS is a law unto themselves).
Second, all involved (well, not, of course, the SS themselves) then have a record for their whole life - usable in case some other event is deemed by the secretive SS worth chasing up and is thus used to justify their corrupt ways. The judges and court officials are often hand-in-glove with the SS, not independent as claimed (I've had personal experience of just this, with the judge discussing the case with the SS outside the courts).
As horrible as child-abuse is (and should be stamped out), I've reluctantly come to the conclusion that the harm done to the 90% of innocent victims outweighs those abused alas.
Guy Hussar, London,
The Portia Group studied dozens of cases before the parents were wrongly convicted.
Today we know hundreds have had their lives destroyed and put in prison with only the very few cases of Sally Clark and two or three others being released.
We demand all those put in prison by these dirty doctors to be released and compensated.
The whole episode is a result of the doctors regulating themselves.
This has proved not only inadequate but against the best interests of the children.
A major enquiry is long overdue.
These miscarriages will amount to a holocaust that will make the murders by Shipman seem trivial.
We cannot hide for ever the truth and every new family that breaks its silence, shames our nation.
One reliable estimate puts the children around the world that have suffered from bad doctors at more than half a million.
The UK government made a feeble attempt 4 years ago to put this affair right.
In 2008 they must enquire and act for these wronged families.
John Fryer, Dinan, France
The secrecy of the family courts has resuled a more child and family abuse than it has, supposedly, prevented. So called experts and judges run riot - handing out arbitrary decisions that are impossible to contest. Divorced families find themselves caught up in the same bruising process. Because of the secrecy there is no feed-back to correct this important but out of control part of our society.
Be thankful if you have never been caught up in it; the only winners are the experts and the legal parasites who end up coining it on the backs of the misery of others.
alain williams, watford, england
Exactly the same happened to me in terms of the injury . I awoke one Sunday morning to find that my 5 month old daughter screamed when I put pressure on her legs i.e. to walk. She was in agony and I was overwhelmed as to why?? I rushed her to hospital worried sick - not knowing why. To this day I do not 100% know what happened but can only assume, as her dad was a paramedic and on duty that evening, and I slept with a monitor in my room, that she got her legs trapped in the cot. This afterthought made me wonder why this has not been addressed befor e- i.e cot danger? she had to have a cast for 3 months, and I remained completely baffled yet feeling guilty for something I had no explanation for. I had one visit from the Socail Worker, which I took as a matter of routine - so in comparison I got off lightly - but lightly for what exactly? I seriously think someone should investigate the number of times this happens in cots given the potential seriousness of the outcome for parents
Lorraine stapleton, Tunbridge Wells,
The secret family courts must be opened up. Secrecy is the handmaiden to incompetence and corruption, both of which are rife in the UK's family courts. Lazy and slyly vicious lawyers compete with biased, slovenly judges and ideologically-motivated social workers to inflict the most harm on British families. Lord Faulkener's so-called "consultation" which claims to prove that children want the secrecy to continue was a sham. Time to change!
boris, London,