Case No. EWFC-63

32.My previous judgment has made it clear that the mother has not been able to manage Y’s health needs, and indeed has caused her significant harm. The mother accepts by her stance about caring for Y that she is not able to meet Y’s overall health needs, although if challenged about many of them as set out above she would struggle to accept individual matters.33.H has far fewer health needs. She does however have a diagnosis of coeliac disease. It is most concerning that there have recently been a number of missed appointments in relation to that, when it is very important she is seen by a dietician. The mother was asked about this in her evidence, as there had been two missed appointments, and a 3rd appointment booked for 14 February 2023. Although we had started to hear evidence on 13 February, it had been known for many months that the Court was not sitting on 14 February. When the mother was asked about this in cross examination she said she had cancelled that appointment because of the court hearing. She was challenged that it had been known ever since this hearing was booked that the Court was not sitting on that date. She then changed her evidence to suggest that she had a different appointment and was attending at the dentist on an emergency basis. 34.The reality is that this type of evidence very clearly mirrored much of her evidence given previously at the finding of fact hearing. Mother’s evidence would often change when she was challenged, and she had no real explanation as to why she had not been able to prioritise matters such as that appointment for H. This is simply a continuation of the pattern of her parenting.