Care Proceedings with an International Element

Maria Sofia Wright is a practising English Solicitor, UK.

• ForewordAcknowledgementsTable of AbbreviationsTables of CasesTables of LegislationChapter 1. IntroductionI. Structure and MethodologyChapter 2. Private International Law and the Regulation of State Child Protection MeasuresI. The Boll Case and the 1902 Guardianship ConventionII. The Convention Concerning the Powers of Authorities and the Law Applicable in Respect of the Protection of Infants 1961III. The 1996 Hague ConventionIV. The Development of Brussels IIaV. ConclusionChapter 3. Forum Issues in Care ProceedingsI. Introduction – Jurisdiction and Welfare under BIIa/HC96II. The Welfare Impact of Jurisdictional Decisions.III. Jurisdictional Decisions and Eekelaar’s ‘Direct’ and ‘Indirect’ Welfare ParadigmIV. Transfers of Jurisdiction and Best InterestsV. Determinations of Habitual Residence and Best InterestsVI. Jurisdiction and Families Fleeing Care ProceedingsVII. Jurisdiction in Care Proceedings which do not engage Brussels IIa and 1996 Hague ConventionVIII. Conclusion: Jurisdiction and WelfareChapter 4. Practice and Permanence in Care Proceedings with an International ElementI. IntroductionII. PermanenceIII. Changing Approaches to Permanence – Policy, Practice and ReformsIV. Kinship Care: Inadequate Assessments and Untested PlacementsV. ConclusionChapter 5. Findings on The Operation of Jurisdictional Rules in BIIa / HC96 in Care ProceedingsI. IntroductionII. ‘Framing’ a Case as Having an International ElementIII. Identifying and Exploring Jurisdictional IssuesIV. Jurisdictional Arguments, Litigation Strategies, Decisions which Impact on WelfareV. Summary Conclusions: Jurisdiction in Care ProceedingsChapter 6. Findings on Requesting and Exchanging Child Protection Information in Care ProceedingsI. IntroductionII. Information about Prior Child Protection Interventions OverseasIII. Communicating Child Protection Concerns in ‘Known Flight’ CasesIV. Communicating Child Protection Concerns in ‘Unknown Flight’ or ‘Planned Relocation’ CasesV. Exchanging Child Protection Information: Comparison with Domestic CasesVI. Summary Conclusions: Co-Operation to Exchange Child Protection InformationChapter 7. Findings on Overseas Assessments in Care ProceedingsI. Overseas Assessments: Domestic ContextII. Overseas Assessments: Which Method?III. Deciding Whether to Conduct and Overseas Kinship AssessmentIV. Adequacy of Overseas AssessmentsV. Assessing a Prospective Kinship Carer’s Relationship with the ChildVI. ‘Top-Up’ Assessments by Social Workers Travelling Overseas: ‘One of our own’.VII. Family Members Travelling to the UK for ‘Top-Up’ AssessmentsVIII. ‘Testing’ an Overseas Kinship PlacementIX. Summary Conclusions: Overseas AssessmentsChapter 8. Findings on Overseas Kinship PlacementsI. IntroductionII. Consent to Place a Child in a BIIa/HC96 State.III. Securing Legal Permanence Overseas: Recognition and Enforcement under BIIa/HC96 and Mirror OrdersIV. Conclusion Chapter 9. Conclusions and RecommendationsAppendix: Sample DescriptionI. The Index Child – Age and Gender as Recorded.II. Mothers and FathersIII. Family CompositionIV. SiblingsV. Family ResidenceVI. EthnicityVII. Family NationalityVIII. Family Immigration StatusBibliography