Answered You can hire a professional tutor to get the answer.
Hi, need to submit a 1500 words paper on the topic Unmarried Parents: Financial Provisions.
Hi, need to submit a 1500 words paper on the topic Unmarried Parents: Financial Provisions. There was no evidence before the court to suggest otherwise. I would, therefore, suggest that the child be examined by an expert in child welfare to first determine whether or not the mother is ultimately right in her assessment that the disparity in the value of her parent’s home causes her some concern. It is also important to determine via a welfare expert whether or not relocating to one of the properties suggested by the father would adversely impact upon the child’s wellbeing. If an expert agrees that relocating and the disparity in the value of the parents’ homes are not matters of concern for the child then an appeal would be likely to succeed. I would go further to predict that the father’s original offer of property valued at 500,000 would likely be ordered. In a worst-case scenario, Judge Bennett’s order might be restored.
The fact remains that the relevant issues are complicated and involve sensitive matters that are further compromised by common law principles that are at the mercy of a very broad judicial function. This fact together with rebuttable presumptions that are taken for granted is the cornerstone of the welfare principle with regards to children. The result is a plethora of random conclusions that are incapable of consistent application. As stated previously, the only hope of success on appeal lies with obtaining legal representation for the child should an expert verify that the child’s best interest is not going to be compromised by relocation. J. Herring’s comments explain how representing a child at the hearing could avoid a random application arise from the application of the welfare principle. He said:
“The strength of the welfare principle is that it focuses the court’s attention on the person whose voice may be the quietest both literally and metaphorically and who has the least control over whether the issue arrives before the court or in the way it does. The child may also be the person with whom the court is least able to empathize.
