Picken and Picken (No. 2)

The proceedings involved an application by the wife, which was dismissed by Young J. The court also made orders concerning the children, R and J, including their referral for assessment and treatment by various medical professionals and services, such as the Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS) and specific paediatricians and general practitioners. The husband was directed to facilitate these appointments and ensure the children followed medical advice.

The court was required to determine the appropriate orders for the children's welfare and medical care, particularly in light of the ongoing family dispute. This included ensuring timely medical assessments and treatment, and managing the children's appointments in a way that did not interfere with their time with the wife. The court also considered the supervision of compliance with its orders and the provision of relevant reports and assessments to medical practitioners.

Young J applied principles relating to the best interests of the child, as enshrined in the *Family Law Act 1975*. The court's reasoning focused on establishing a clear framework for the children's medical care, ensuring continuity of treatment and appropriate professional involvement. The orders reflected a detailed approach to managing the children's health needs, with specific directions for the husband and the Independent Children's Lawyer. Compliance with these orders was to be supervised by a Family Consultant, who could report back to the court as necessary.