UK mother separated from children for years has ‘draconian’ order overturned

The Guardian World

by Hannah Summers

February 13, 2026

AI-Generated Deep Dive Summary

A UK mother was finally reunited with her son after being separated for nearly six years due to flawed evidence presented by an unregulated psychologist. The case involved psychologist Melanie Gill, whose assessment led to “extraordinary” and “draconian” court orders that effectively severed the mother’s relationship with her children. These orders were later overturned in the high court, marking a significant victory for the mother and highlighting serious concerns about the use of unregulated professionals in family court cases. The situation began in 2019 when the woman’s children were removed by family courts following Gill’s evaluation. The psychologist’s unregulated status raised questions about the reliability of her findings, which were used to justify the removal of the children and the termination of the mother’s contact with them. Over the next six years, the mother was denied access to her children, despite her repeated efforts to challenge the court’s decision. Lawyers for the mother argued that Gill’s evidence was flawed and lacked proper oversight, leading to the issuance of “draconian” orders that went beyond what was necessary or reasonable. The high court agreed, ruling that the evidence used to remove the children had serious shortcomings. This case underscores the potential risks of relying on unregulated professionals in sensitive legal proceedings and highlights the importance of ensuring that expert testimony is subject to rigorous scrutiny. The reunion between the mother and her son marks a turning point in this lengthy and emotionally charged case. It serves as a reminder of the need for greater oversight in family court cases, particularly when psychological evaluations are involved. The outcome also raises broader questions about the reliance on unregulated experts in legal decision-making processes and the potential consequences for families caught in such disputes. For readers interested in child welfare, legal reform, and the role of psychologists in courts, this case provides a compelling example of how flawed evidence can have far-reaching and devastating impacts. It calls for greater transparency and accountability in expert assessments to ensure that children’s best interests are always prioritized and that parents’ rights are not unjustly eroded.

Verticals

worldpolitics

Originally published on The Guardian World on 2/13/2026