A 14-year-old boy has lost a legal battle against his parents after they relocated him from London to Ghana to attend boarding school. Described in court as shy, articulate, and passionate about cooking and football, the boy claimed his parents deceived him into traveling to Africa under the pretense of visiting a sick relative. He insisted that had he known the true purpose of the trip, he would never have agreed to it. In a heartfelt statement to the court, he expressed feeling “like I am living in hell” and pleaded to return to England as soon as possible.

High Court Judge Mr. Justice Hayden acknowledged the case as “both sobering and rather depressing” but ruled in favor of the parents, stating their decision was motivated by “deep, obvious, and unconditional love” for their son. The judge noted that returning the boy to the UK could expose him to greater harm, as his parents believed he was at risk of being drawn into gang culture and had shown an “unhealthy interest in knives.” The boy’s father emphasized their fear of him becoming “yet another black teenager stabbed to death on the streets of London.”

The teenager, who had lived in the UK since birth, described his experience in Ghana as deeply unsettling. He claimed he was mocked, struggled to adapt, and frequently got into fights due to cultural and language barriers. Feeling “so scared and desperate,” he reached out to the British High Commission in Accra and the charity Children and Families Across Borders, which connected him with lawyers from the International Family Law Group. In his plea, he wrote, “I am from London, England, and I want to go back home,” adding that he felt mistreated at the school and begged to return to his former life.

However, the court heard that the parents’ decision was driven by concerns for their son’s safety in London. His mother described the move as “not a punishment but a measure to protect him,” referencing the tragic murder of 14-year-old Kelyan Bokassa, who was stabbed to death on a bus in Woolwich earlier this year. She expressed her fear that her son would not survive in the UK and did not want to be complicit in his “destruction.”

Rebecca Foulkes, representing the boy’s father, highlighted that the teenager met 11 out of 15 indicators on an NSPCC checklist for potential gang involvement or criminal exploitation, including school absences, unexplained money, and carrying weapons. His school also raised concerns, citing suspicions of criminal activity and noting his possession of expensive items. Despite these allegations, the boy denied any involvement in gangs or carrying knives, though he admitted his behavior had not been exemplary and speculated this might have influenced his parents’ decision.

The case revolved around the issue of parental responsibility and whether the parents acted unlawfully by sending their son to boarding school without his consent. In a post-judgment statement, the parents described the ordeal as “a really difficult time for us all” and reiterated their commitment to protecting their son and moving forward as a family.

James Netto, the boy’s solicitor from the International Family Law Group, expressed shock at the ruling, noting the teenager was “incredibly disappointed and upset” and considering his next steps. The boy’s barrister, Deirdre Fottrell KC, emphasized the challenges of attending a school in a different jurisdiction, far from home. The boy lamented the decline in his education, stating that Ghanaian classes were less rigorous than those in the UK and that he had been out of formal education since last summer, relying on online learning. He wrote, “I want to have an education again and grow up like a normal person. I feel like my brain is hurt here.”

Despite the ruling, the boy’s father recently visited him in Ghana and reported a positive relationship. They explored another boarding school as a potential option, though no placement was available until September, and the boy had not expressed interest in attending. Netto noted a rise in similar cases, with teenagers increasingly seeking court protection from challenging or vulnerable situations. He observed that parents often perceive their children as “falling in with the wrong crowd” or exhibiting “unorthodox behaviors.”

Following the judgment, Netto revealed that his firm had already received inquiries from other young people in similar circumstances. The case underscores the complex interplay between parental responsibility, child welfare, and the legal system in addressing familial disputes and safeguarding young people.

Click on the link to join the Metascholar News channel for curated, meaningful stories tailored just for YOU: https://t.me/metascholarworkshopsltd