Children: History repeated

Susan Reed asks whether the lessons of the Cleveland inquiry have still not been learned ‘The professional failures of the various agencies involved with the family in AS v TH meant that the children were not only left in a situation where one parent was permitted to persist in conduct that was harmful to their …
This post is only available to members.

Cases Referenced

  • AS v TH & ors (False Allegations of Abuse) [2016] EWHC 532 (Fam)
  • D v B & ors (flawed sexual abuse enquiry) [2006] EWHC 2987 (Fam)
  • Re B & ors (Allegations of Sexual Abuse: Child's Evidence) [2006] EWCA Civ 773
  • Re D (Child Abuse: Interviews) [1998] 2 FLR 10
  • Re H (Minors); Re K (Minors) (Child Abuse: Evidence) [1989] 2 FLR 313
  • Re H and R (Child Sexual Abuse: Standard of Proof) [1995] 1 FLR 643
  • Re I-A (Allegations of Sexual Abuse) [2012] 2 FLR 837
  • Re M (Minors) (Sexual Abuse: Evidence) [1993] 1 FLR 822
  • Re N (A Minor) (Child Abuse: Evidence) [1996] 2 FCR 572
  • Re S (A Child) [2013] EWCA Civ 1254
  • Re X (A Minor) (Child Abuse: Evidence) [1989] 1 FLR 30
  • TW v A City Council & ors (fact-finding: finding of sexual abuse) [2011] EWCA Civ 17