About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

36 J. Soc. Welfare & Fam. L. 1 (2014)

handle is hein.journals/jnlosclwl36 and id is 1 raw text is: 


Journal of Social Welfare & Family Law, 2014                            3  Rtedge
Vol. 36, No. 1, 1-2, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09649069.2014.886874




                                  EDITORIAL




We  start 2014 with the usual rich collection of papers, but with some notable changes to the
content and format of the specialist sections. First, the journal no longer includes a Current
Developments  Section. While, for many years this section has provided useful information
on the most up-to-date developments in family and social welfare law, particularly where
such information  was not readily accessible, the proliferation of good quality, online
sources of information means  that this is no longer the case. Moreover, we have been
fortunate to present detailed, critical perspectives on the most recent and dramatic
developments  in family  law through  a number  of  dedicated special issues. We  are
immensely  grateful to lain MacDonald for his efforts in editing this section and for the many
valued contributions he made to the development of the journal over the years.
    The second important change relates to the Cases Section. The editors, Robert George
and Leanne  Smith, have adopted a shorter format (1200 to 1500 words) to allow for the
inclusion of three or four cases in each issue. We trust that the cases featured in this issue
will be evidence enough that this change has not been implemented to the detriment of the
high quality and usefulness of this section. In the process, the aim is to capture a broader
range of cases, attracting a more diverse range of commentators (including PhD students),
and achieving a faster turnover of material.
    In this issue, we go back to basics, with Jonathan Herring's analysis of the use of
presumptions in family cases. Specifically, he interrogates whether the use of presumptions
is truly congruent with a rigorous assessment of the best interests of the child. One might
argue that the evident retreat from the use of presumptions in favour of a simple, fact-based
consideration of the welfare of the child raises questions as to the wisdom and potential
impact of the Children and Families Bill which codifies a presumption in favour of both
parents caring for the child post separation.
    Brenda Hale's  contribution extends consideration of best interests assessments to
'new' families, specifically those in which the genetic parentage of the child does not
coincide with his or her social or psychological parentage. The discussion highlights the
highly selective, 'messy' application of the welfare principle in a context that has so far
been  dominated by  discussions around the 'right' to parent, and calls for more robust
regulation of arrangements that take place outside the confines of the licensed clinic. Many
of these issues are evidenced in the linked cases of Re G (A Minor); Re Z (A Minor) [2013]
EWHC 134 (Fam) which are the subject of Philip   Bremner's  commentary  in the Cases
section.
    Nell Munro explores the best interests principle in a different context: that relating to
decisions made on behalf of those who are deemed to lack mental capacity. She exposes
the inconsistent and incoherent approach to conducting this assessment, and particularly
the reluctance to take into account the wishes and feelings of the individual. This, the
author argues, presents a fundamental challenge to upholding human dignity. On a similar
note, Fenge et al. consider the quality and accessibility of support for those with mental
health conditions who are involved in the criminal justice system. While links between
mental  health and criminal offending are widely  acknowledged,  the authors point to


© 2014 Taylor & Francis

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

profiles profiles most