It is concerned that judges could be raising the standard of proof required when serious allegations are made against parents or others who deal with children.
The usual standard of proof in family courts is the "balance of probabilities", not proof "beyond reasonable doubt", which applies in criminal courts.
But the association's press officer, Richard White, said it was concerned about a case last year in which Mr Justice Bodey said that, in serious cases, the difference between the civil and criminal standards of proof was "largely illusory".
White, a south London solicitor, said he had recently acted in a case where another judge had said Mr Justice Bodey's remarks must be true in some cases. "I think it's wrong to apply the higher standard in care proceedings, which are purely to secure the welfare of the child," said White. "You never know if cases like this will become established. If they do it will be harder to protect the interests of children."
Register Now to Continue Reading
Thank you for visiting Children & Young People Now and making use of our archive of more than 60,000 expert features, topics hubs, case studies and policy updates. Why not register today and enjoy the following great benefits:
What's Included
-
Free access to 4 subscriber-only articles per month
-
Email newsletter providing advice and guidance across the sector
Already have an account? Sign in here
