Family Court at Leeds
Case Numbers: LS21C00133, KH22C5008, LS22C50104
Date: 18th May 2023
Judge: MR Justice Poole

Parties Involved

• Family R:
  • Mother: MR
  • Father: FR
  • Child: AR
• Family S:
  • Mother: MS
  • Father: FS
  • Children: DS, ES, GS, HS
• Family T:
  • Mother: MT
  • Father: FT (not appearing)
  • Children: HT, JV, KV, LW

Representation

• Leeds City Council: Julia Cheetham KC, Sara Anning, Emily Chipchase
• East Riding of Yorkshire Council: Taryn Lee KC, Sarah Blackmore
• Wakefield Metropolitan District Council: Jacqueline Thomas KC, Brett Davies
• Defendants and Families: Various legal representatives, including Darren Howe KC, Karl Rowley KC, Ruth Henke KC, Rachel Langdale KC, and others for the respective mothers, fathers, and children.
• Interveners: Bryan Cox KC, Luke Berry for Sheffield Children’s NHS Foundation Trust; Natalia Levine for carers AC and BC (for JV and KV); James Ketteringham for South Yorkshire Police.

Key Facts

• Allegations: The case centers around the serious issue of fabricated or induced illness in children by their parents, a practice known as Munchausen syndrome by proxy or factitious disorder imposed on another (FDIA).
• The proceedings involved three separate families, each with multiple children who were allegedly subjected to abuse involving fabricated medical conditions or unnecessary medical treatments.
• In Family R, the mother, MR, was accused of inducing illness in her child AR.
• In Family S, the mother MS and father FS were involved with multiple children, DS, ES, GS, and HS.
• In Family T, the case involved several children, including HT, JV, KV, and LW.

Legal Issues

1. Fabricated or Induced Illness:
   The primary issue for determination was whether the mothers, and in some cases the fathers, were involved in fabricating or inducing illnesses in their children, leading to unnecessary medical treatments and harm.
2. Welfare of the Children:
   The court needed to assess the impact of these practices on the children’s health, emotional well-being, and safety.
3. Intervention of Authorities:
   The involvement of multiple local authorities and NHS trusts highlighted the complexity of the case, with interventions based on the need to protect the children and ensure proper care.

Observations

• The court examined extensive medical evidence to determine the extent to which the parents were responsible for causing harm by fabricating illnesses.
• The psychological and emotional impact on the children was a critical factor in the court’s deliberations, with concern for their safety and the long-term effects of the abuse.
• The intervention of various professionals, including NHS trust representatives and police, emphasized the seriousness of the allegations and the coordinated effort to protect the children.

Decision

The judge made findings of fact on each family’s case, determining the nature of the abuse, the responsibility of each parent, and the best course of action for each child’s future. The details of the final decisions in terms of care orders, contact arrangements, and any criminal proceedings were based on these findings.

This case is significant due to its complex nature, involving multiple families and children, each with their own set of allegations of fabricated or induced illnesses, and the important role of the family courts in protecting vulnerable children from such harm.

• Download BR-and-others-Findings-of-Fact-For-Publication-11-24-002.pdffile
• BR and others (Findings of Fact)

• Download Re-BR-Anonymisation-Disclsoure-of-Judgment-and-Permission-to-Appeal-by-Witness-For-Publication-11-24.pdffile
• Re BR (Anonymisation Disclosure of Judgment and Permission to Appeal by Witness)