Fern5827
August 16th 03, 02:01 PM
Subject: UK: Child can sue state for harm when family falsely accused
From: (Fern5827)
Date: 8/16/2003 8:48 AM Eastern Daylight Time
Message-id: >
News
Girl can sue over false abuse claim Aug 1 2003
By Neil Atkinson, The Huddersfield Daily Examiner
A GIRL of nine can sue Kirklees Council after allegations of child abuse were
proved to be wrong.
The girl's father and older brother were forced to sleep away from the family
home after social workers were called in.
But the girl was later found to be suffering from a rare medical condition
which a paediatrician mistakenly thought could be evidence of abuse.
Court of Appeal judges ruled yesterday that the girl can now take action
against the council and against Dewsbury Health Care NHS Trust.
It was one of three test cases heard at the court and may now be followed by
many more.
Kirklees Council could face action in at least two similar cases after the
judges' ruling.
Health authorities cannot be sued by parents who have been wrongly accused of
abusing their children, the Court of Appeal ruled.
But children can take action if they are victims of negligence over
investigation of abuse or in care proceedings.
The important decision came after three senior judges headed by the Master of
the Rolls, Lord Phillips, heard three test cases involving accusations by
health professionals against a parent of abuse of a child.
In each case the accusations proved to be unfounded and the parents claimed
damages for psychiatric harm said to have been caused to them by the
consequences of the false allegations.
The judges dismissed the appeals by the parents, but allowed the appeal by a
child who was nine at the time she was taken into care after a wrongful
diagnosis of sexual abuse by her father.
Lord Phillips said the court had reached the conclusion that it was no longer
legitimate to rule there was no duty of care owed to a child over child abuse
investigations or care proceedings.
But he said the position of the parents was "very different".
"We consider that there are cogent reasons of public policy for concluding
that, where child care decisions are being taken, no common law duty of care
should be owed to the parents."
The judges ordered anonymity for the individuals concerned but allowed the
naming of the health authorities.
In the case against Dewsbury Health Care NHS Trust and Kirklees Council, a
father and daughter claimed for psychiatric injury and financial loss resulting
from unfounded allegations that the father might have sexually abused his
daughter, which led to the father being denied access to his daughter.
The daughter suffered from a condition known as Schamberg's disease, which
produces discoloured patches on the skin.
When the girl hurt herself on her bicycle when she was nine, a consultant
paediatrician said the marks were suggestive of sexual abuse.
The father and girl's eldest brother were told not to sleep in the same house
as the girl. Both parents were prevented from seeing her in hospital.
When the diagnosis of Schamberg's disease was made, no further steps were taken
by the council's social services who accepted there had been no abuse.
The appeal court ruled that the child could claim against the local authority
for negligence in the way their employees contributed to the child protection
investigation.
She has already been given the go-ahead to take action against the health
authority by a county court judge.
A Kirklees spokesman said: "While we are aware of the judgement, we are not
able to give a response until we have studied the findings in detail."
Top
From: (Fern5827)
Date: 8/16/2003 8:48 AM Eastern Daylight Time
Message-id: >
News
Girl can sue over false abuse claim Aug 1 2003
By Neil Atkinson, The Huddersfield Daily Examiner
A GIRL of nine can sue Kirklees Council after allegations of child abuse were
proved to be wrong.
The girl's father and older brother were forced to sleep away from the family
home after social workers were called in.
But the girl was later found to be suffering from a rare medical condition
which a paediatrician mistakenly thought could be evidence of abuse.
Court of Appeal judges ruled yesterday that the girl can now take action
against the council and against Dewsbury Health Care NHS Trust.
It was one of three test cases heard at the court and may now be followed by
many more.
Kirklees Council could face action in at least two similar cases after the
judges' ruling.
Health authorities cannot be sued by parents who have been wrongly accused of
abusing their children, the Court of Appeal ruled.
But children can take action if they are victims of negligence over
investigation of abuse or in care proceedings.
The important decision came after three senior judges headed by the Master of
the Rolls, Lord Phillips, heard three test cases involving accusations by
health professionals against a parent of abuse of a child.
In each case the accusations proved to be unfounded and the parents claimed
damages for psychiatric harm said to have been caused to them by the
consequences of the false allegations.
The judges dismissed the appeals by the parents, but allowed the appeal by a
child who was nine at the time she was taken into care after a wrongful
diagnosis of sexual abuse by her father.
Lord Phillips said the court had reached the conclusion that it was no longer
legitimate to rule there was no duty of care owed to a child over child abuse
investigations or care proceedings.
But he said the position of the parents was "very different".
"We consider that there are cogent reasons of public policy for concluding
that, where child care decisions are being taken, no common law duty of care
should be owed to the parents."
The judges ordered anonymity for the individuals concerned but allowed the
naming of the health authorities.
In the case against Dewsbury Health Care NHS Trust and Kirklees Council, a
father and daughter claimed for psychiatric injury and financial loss resulting
from unfounded allegations that the father might have sexually abused his
daughter, which led to the father being denied access to his daughter.
The daughter suffered from a condition known as Schamberg's disease, which
produces discoloured patches on the skin.
When the girl hurt herself on her bicycle when she was nine, a consultant
paediatrician said the marks were suggestive of sexual abuse.
The father and girl's eldest brother were told not to sleep in the same house
as the girl. Both parents were prevented from seeing her in hospital.
When the diagnosis of Schamberg's disease was made, no further steps were taken
by the council's social services who accepted there had been no abuse.
The appeal court ruled that the child could claim against the local authority
for negligence in the way their employees contributed to the child protection
investigation.
She has already been given the go-ahead to take action against the health
authority by a county court judge.
A Kirklees spokesman said: "While we are aware of the judgement, we are not
able to give a response until we have studied the findings in detail."
Top