WHEN a child's emotional development was being harmed by being exposed to a parent's religious beliefs and practices, the family court at Leicester exercised its powers under the Children Act 1989 to remove the child from the care of his parents, and to place him in the care of the local authority.

The child, identified only as N, is a boy aged nearly eight who has been the subject of several court hearings, owing to the conflict between his parents.

His father's application for a shared residence order brought N's mother's religious beliefs into focus. She is a Jehovah's Witness.

The court then ordered the local authority to undertake an investigation of N's circumstances, and social workers, a guardian, and a psychologist became involved.

The local authority filed a document stating that N had suffered emotional harm through being exposed to the ongoing conflict between his parents, and being immersed by his mother in her religious beliefs and practices, with the intention of alienating N from his father.

At a subsequent hearing, the mother gave undertakings to the court that she would not take N to Kingdom Hall, or any other religious meeting of Jehovah's Witnesses, or talk to him about religion or the Jehovah's Witness organisation, or allow N to go on its website, or provide N with any religious DVDs.

If N tried to discuss religion with her, the mother undertook to tell him that the court had indicated that it would prefer her not to discuss such matters with him for the time being.

The father then claimed that the mother had broken the terms of those undertakings, and further court hearings took place.

The social worker who gave evidence considered that the mother's undertakings to the court were themselves having an adverse impact on N. Not being allowed to pray with his mother was a difficulty, because he had done so in the past, and "it is part of who he is." N thought, the social worker said, that Jehovah "will be mad" with him for not praying.

Evidence from N's school described him as "anxious, confused, distressed, and distracted". There were problems with lessons on religion because N's very clear beliefs about Jehovah seemed to challenge his learning about other faiths.

In a religious-education lesson, N had deliberately cut up teaching materials, and seemed to "shut down if things don't accord with his beliefs". N said that he did not trust anyone; that he could not be with people who did not believe in Jehovah; and that he "did not want to go to Daddy's because he . . . was not a Jehovah" believer.

The guardian, and a psychologist appointed by the court, also gave evidence about the emotional impact on N's development of being immersed in his mother's religion. The social worker attributed N's problems to the conflict between his parents, not to the religious issues.

The child's welfare is the court's paramount consideration, and the judge said that he had come to the clear conclusion that, in the light of the emotional harm that N had suffered and was continuing to suffer, it was proportionate, and in N's best welfare interests, for him to be removed from his parents, and placed in foster care under an interim care order.