In the matter of W and J

Advocate H. J. Heath ( as legal representative on behalf of the Guardian appointed for W and J)

Advocate A. J. Clarke for the Second Respondent (not present and excused from attending).

On 29 th November, 2010, the Court found that the threshold criteria in Article 24(2) of the Children (Jersey) Law 2002 were met in relation to both children. However, the proceedings were adjourned until today because of the progress which the mother was making in relation to looking after the children.

All parties agree with the care plan and that a care order should be made, in other words the mother, the father, D and the Guardian. We have noted the observations by the Guardian in his report concerning the views of Dr Hunt, and those of the social worker in her report concerning the views of Dr Cameron. But we agree with the Guardian and the social worker that the views of those two medical practitioners do not lead us to depart from the opinion that the care plan is the best way forward for W.

Turning to J, the reports are to like effect. The position is, of course, that he has always been in the care of his mother and father and for the same reasons as in relation to W, we are satisfied that a care order should be made and the care plan approved; and again, all parties agree with this course of action.