Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorSloan, Brianen
dc.date.accessioned2015-05-14T13:15:47Z
dc.date.available2015-05-14T13:15:47Z
dc.date.issued2015-12-27en
dc.identifier.citationSloan. Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law (2015) Vol. 37, Issue 4, pp. 437-457. doi: 10.1080/09649069.2015.1121962
dc.identifier.issn0964-9069
dc.identifier.urihttps://www.repository.cam.ac.uk/handle/1810/247696
dc.description.abstractIn $\textit{Re B (A Child) (Care Proceedings: Appeal)}$ [2013] UKSC 33 the Supreme Court President emphasised that ‘adoption of a child against her parents’ wishes should only be contemplated as a last resort – when all else fails’ because of adoption’s draconian nature. $\textit{Re B}$ has been cited dozens of times by the lower courts in the short time since it was decided. The aim of this article is to assess whether the influence of $\textit{Re B}$ is a matter of substance or mere rhetoric.
dc.languageEnglishen
dc.language.isoenen
dc.publisherTaylor & Francis
dc.subjectchild protectionen
dc.subjectjudiciaryen
dc.subjectlaw reformen
dc.subjectchildren’s rightsen
dc.titleAdoption decisions in England: $\textit{Re B (A Child) (Care Proceedings: Appeal)}$ and beyonden
dc.typeArticle
dc.description.versionThis is the author accepted manuscript. The final version is available from Taylor & Francis via https://doi.org/10.1080/09649069.2015.1121962en
prism.endingPage457
prism.publicationDate2015en
prism.publicationNameJournal of Social Welfare and Family Lawen
prism.startingPage437
prism.volume37en
rioxxterms.versionofrecord10.1080/09649069.2015.1121962en
rioxxterms.licenseref.urihttp://www.rioxx.net/licenses/all-rights-reserveden
rioxxterms.licenseref.startdate2015-12-27en
dc.contributor.orcidSloan, Brian [0000-0003-3468-8950]
dc.identifier.eissn1469-9621
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Reviewen
rioxxterms.freetoread.startdate2016-12-27


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record