US Edition The unmarried woman was said to have told the married father of her child that it had died to keep him away, and wore loose clothes and visited a hospital far from her home so relatives would not learn she was pregnant.
The father got hold of the baby girl’s birth certificate and tried to get legal rights to visiting her, even though he had by then had a newborn with his own wife.
But a judge ruled that the love child should stay with its adoptive parents, and not meet its father, because of the danger that its mother’s family would kill it, and her, because of the shame of their secret relationship.
Confirming that decision, three Appeal Court judges said on Wednesday: “In the particular circumstances of this case, the judge rightly regarded the risk of physical harm to [the baby] and [its mother] as being of major importance. Here the evidence was, in our judgment, compelling.
“[The baby] was conceived in a relationship which was unacceptable to [the mother's] traditional Muslim family and conducted in secrecy.
“When she realised she might be pregnant she ran away from home for fear of the reaction of her family and, in particular, her father.
“Shortly after her pregnancy was confirmed, [the mother] took steps to have her baby adopted at birth.
“Although she returned to her home, she concealed her advancing pregnancy by wearing loose clothes and travelling to the other side of her town for her antenatal care.
“As soon as [the baby] was born, she was relinquished for adoption because [the mother] genuinely feared for [the baby's] safety should [the grandfather] become aware of or be forced to acknowledge her existence.
“[The mother's] evidence, supported as it was by her actions and the evidence of [the father] and an experienced police officer, drove the judge to conclude that refusal of the order would carry with it a significant risk of physical harm. In our judgment this conclusion cannot be criticised.”
The judgement, in which all of the parties are kept anonymous for their safety, tells how the baby’s parents are both Muslims from foreign countries “but their cultures differ”.
The father was already married but his wife was not in the country when he “pursued” the unmarried woman, and their affair was kept secret because they would have faced “repercussions, certainly from her community” if it became public.
She became pregnant late in 2009 and ran away from home, “terrified of the reaction of her family, and particularly her father”.
The woman later told social services she wanted to have the baby adopted because she was “scared” that her father “would hurt her and the family would reject her”.
After the birth, her mother was quickly discharged from hospital and a year ago her daughter was placed with another Muslim couple.
Meanwhile the baby’s father claimed that he had been told the baby had died, although the mother denied this, and only after contacting police and hospitals did he find her birth certificate.
When the father asked for information about the baby and a residence order, social services wanted him to be kept in the dark about the adoption proceedings while a family judge feared he would tell the mother’s family about the birth.
“Enquiries of the police showed that [the baby’s grandmother] had told them that if [its grandfather] found out about the child, he would consider himself honour bound to kill the child, [its mother], [the grandmother] herself and her other children.”
The father was eventually told that the baby was “alive and well and had been placed for adoption” but an order was made banning him from contacting the infant or her family.
In July a High Court Family Division judge, Mrs Justice Parker, ruled that the baby would be at “very significant risk” if it were placed with its natural father and his wife, while it might “provoke action to preserve the family’s honour” if the mother’s relatives found out about the child.
At the same time, the “prolonged agony of parting” from her new parents would cause the baby “immense distress”.
The judge concluded that the baby had had a “very unfortunate start in life” and that consideration of its lifelong welfare required its adoption.
The child’s father appealed the judgement but three appeal court judges, Lord Justice Munby, Lady Justice Black and Lord Justice Kitchin, agreed that the right decision had been made in a “most difficult” case.