Morecrofts’ Helen Broughton says the way family law uses experts is flawed

THE recent case of the Webster couple challenging social services highlights problems with the way our family law system is resourced.

The couple were forced to give their children up for adoption after accusations of abuse, but have now been told they cannot get them back by the Court of Appeal, despite a potential miscarriage of justice.

An Adoption Order is final, and once it has been put in place can’t be revoked. This means it’s essential courts make the right decision in the first place. But, in the Webster case, vital evidence didn’t appear that may have changed the ruling.

The Websters’ children were given up for adoption after evidence of injuries caused by the parents in 2003.

But the couple produced evidence in 2007 the injuries were the result of scurvy. Had this evidence been produced at the outset, the decision could have been overturned.

Unfortunately, the courts encourage all parties to agree and instruct one independent expert and there can be difficulties persuading a court that a second medical opinion on behalf of a parent is proportionate, necessary and affordable.

But this case shows courts need to be more flexible with medical or expert evidence to ensure there are no more miscarriages of justice.