000 | 03533nab a2200409Ia 4500 | ||
---|---|---|---|
001 | 113186 | ||
005 | 20250625151142.0 | ||
008 | 110331s2007 eng | ||
022 | _a1746-8000 | ||
040 |
_aWSS _dAFV |
||
100 |
_aJohnston, Hannah _91440 |
||
245 |
_aThe experiences of parents with an intellectual disability within the New Zealand Family Court system _cJohnston, Hannah; Henaghan, Mark; Mirfin-Veitch, Brigit |
||
260 |
_aWellington _bLexis Nexis _c2007 |
||
365 |
_a00 _b0 |
||
520 | _aThis article discusses the concerns that arise when the state intervenes in cases of inadequate parental care involving parents with an intellectual disability. A number of cases are drawn on in examining whether these parents are treated differently to other parents by the Family Courts when Care and Protection proceedings arise under the Children, Young Persons, and Their Families Act (1989). The article is based on a three year study that relates to parenting by adults with an intellectual disability. Some of the cases involve adoption and termination proceedings. The author does not aim to criticise the decisions reached by the Family Courts, but highlights some of the inconsistencies and barriers that these parents face when they have interactions with the Family Court. The discussion traverses how intellectual disability is described by the Courts and the involvement of parents in the legal system; the Court's lack of understanding about intellectual disability (and the lack of understanding by parents of Court processes); and the wider social concerns impacting on parenting ability. Also discussed is: maintaining relationships once the parent loses primary care, assessment of risk factors, reaction to change initiated by parents, need for support, use of expert evidence, and using the law to build up a network of support for parents. It is concluded that Judges face a difficult task in assessing the parenting abilities of parents with an intellectual disability. The diversity of this group of parents and their increased vulnerability mean that it is crucial that a careful and individual assessment, in accordance with the statutory framework, is conducted on a case by case basis. Judges need to be cautious of displaying a bias towards rejecting the evidence of parties who support the parenting capabilities of people with an intellectual disability. The authors argue that further education of the judiciary about intellectual disability, including behavioural manifestations and responses caused by the disability, would provide a wider awareness and more individually tailored responses to proceedings with these people. | ||
650 | 2 | 7 |
_2FVC _aADOPTION _944 |
650 | 2 | 7 |
_2FVC _aCARE AND PROTECTION _997 |
650 | 2 | 7 |
_2FVC _aCASE STUDIES _9101 |
650 | 2 | 7 |
_2FVC _aFAMILIES _9238 |
650 | 2 | 7 |
_2FVC _aFAMILY COURT _9241 |
650 | 2 | 7 |
_2FVC _aFAMILY LAW _9244 |
650 | 2 | 4 |
_aOUT OF HOME CARE _9260 |
650 | 2 | 7 |
_2FVC _aINTERVENTION _9326 |
650 | 2 | 7 |
_2FVC _aJUSTICE _9333 |
650 | 2 | 7 |
_2FVC _aMENTAL HEALTH _9377 |
650 | 2 | 7 |
_2FVC _aNEGLECT _9401 |
650 | 2 | 7 |
_2FVC _aPARENTS _9430 |
651 | 4 |
_aNEW ZEALAND _92588 |
|
650 | 2 | 7 |
_9196 _aDISABLED PEOPLE |
650 | 2 | 7 |
_9317 _aPEOPLE WITH LEARNING DISABILITIES _2FVC |
650 | 2 | 4 |
_aCONTACT (ACCESS) _929 |
700 | 1 |
_aHenaghan, Mark _91333 |
|
700 | 1 |
_aMirfin-Veitch, Brigit _91733 |
|
500 | _aNew Zealand Family Law Journal 5(9) March 2007 : 226-236 | ||
773 | 0 | _tNew Zealand Family Law Journal 5(9) March 2007 : 226-236 | |
942 |
_2ddc _cARTICLE |
||
999 |
_c1886 _d1886 |