Correcting, clarifying or commenting on media reports of family court cases
Explaining or commenting on published judgments of family court cases
Highlighting other transparency news
MEDIA (MIS)REPORTS OF FAMILY COURT CASES
The Mirror – Reported with Boy, 8, taken off mum by social workers who said ‘she had not taken him for ice cream in response to GM v Camarthenshire County Council, sparking scepticism, then acknowledgement that this was essentially correct. Mostyn J was critical of social work evidence that a child should stay in care based on this, among other, relatively trivial parenting flaws (and of the use of ‘attachment theory’). See discussions here and here. Of course it’s not possible to reach a fully informed view with publication of neither the original judgment nor the SW evidence. (The case also highlights the pressing need for better use of research evidence in social work assessments and court decisions. See the What Works Centre and Observatory). Guest post to follow:
— Daily Mirror (@DailyMirror) June 13, 2018
For once, press reports accurate. Though they miss the important bit, which is the monstering of attachment theory
— suesspicious minds (@suesspiciousmin) June 13, 2018
The Sunday Times – We responded to Roy Lidle’s column in Name-calling of judges. The lecture the Sunday Times don’t link to, or even adequately reference to give readers a fighting chance of finding and reading what Sir James did say, is here:
— transparency project (@seethrujustice) June 11, 2018
I don't think Munby was praising the breakdown of the nuclear family, but rather simply welcoming the fact that other family 'types' are now recognised.
— Bolchy (@johnbolch) June 12, 2018
The Daily Mail (and BBC News) – We commented on the Daily Mail’s misleading headline, Nurse’s one-year-old son is taken from her care after she let him sit in a Bob The Builder toy car that was ‘inappropriate’ for his age. See Bob the Builder here. We’ve written to the Daily Mail and will update when we can on their response and our next actions. See also this comment on the later BBC News item:
.@BBCNews For shame BBC! We thought you were better!! This is such shoddy reporting. https://t.co/ej9qlq8ilE Here is the full judgment : https://t.co/oVF1ZLBiQi it bears little resemblance to your report. (h/t @LizTrinder1) #inaccuratebyomission https://t.co/sJyM66zxli
— transparency project (@seethrujustice) June 6, 2018
The Daily Mail – Twitter commentators called out Why modern wives are willing to ‘turn a blind eye’ to their love cheat husbands as figures show a major drop in the numbers of divorces initiated by women in the Daily Mail for the ‘junk news’ it was:
Yet another @HallBrownLaw ‘research’ story in the Mail (and previous ‘research’ in Telegraph and Times). This is junk news IMO and needs calling out. There is no ‘research’ by HallBrown on adultery – it is ONS data with (IMO) poor commentary. 1/ https://t.co/eFimaPbORp
— Liz Trinder (@LizTrinder1) June 4, 2018
BBC Radio 4 The Untold – With the story of one mother’s experience of international child abduction. Particularly interesting for the suggestions that sensitive, skilled journalism over the course of an investigation, may have played a part in an eventual plan for a first contact between the abducted child and her mother in over a year. Listen here:
Journalists – what do we owe the people who become our case studies? Looking to interview journos who have struggled with this on sensitive stories where we build relationships often over a long time. DMs open. Pls RT
— Louise Tickle (@louisetickle) June 14, 2018
The Bureau of Investigative Journalism, BBC News, BBC Radio 4, the Guardian, the Times, the Brief – Covered new research out this week suggestive of a crisis many say is engulfing our child protection, care and adoption ‘systems’.
John Bolch summarised the findings here on wide variance in numbers of 0-5’s adopted from council to council; public spending on children; the latest care numbers statistics; and from the Care Crisis Review, launched with this speech from Sir Andrew McFarlane.
Media reports included the Bureau of Investigative Journalism; BBC News and BBC Radio 4 (from 2: 40) [also at Audioboom] on the ‘adoption postcode lottery’; BBC News on the Commissioners findings with BBC One Sunday Politics London (sorry London-centric) on cuts and challenges facing London councils (from 53 minutes); and the Times, the Brief, the Guardian (also here), and the BBC, in response to the care crisis review.
Does where you live affect the chances of your children being taken into care/adopted? Our latest report reveals how children in one area are 12x more likely to be put for adoption than in others. https://t.co/qjHeAdSNmJ … pic.twitter.com/e6ItbxAjPe
— The Bureau (@TBIJ) June 11, 2018
Not too late to catch up with @DCSLeeds explaining the headline findings from the Care Crisis Review on @BBCr4today last Wednesday: https://t.co/eTfYuXzd0n (02:42:38) @FamilyRightsGp pic.twitter.com/HR4N1ArTnI
— transparency project (@seethrujustice) June 17, 2018
All those in @LGAChildren @ADCStweets @educationgovuk @FairerFostering @theNAFP & the @HMCTSgovuk & @MoJGovUK should read this report & engage constructively with the 20 options for change. If we all act in concert then significant improvement is possible https://t.co/p9jjJU2Ass
— TACT Foster & Adopt (@TACTCare) June 15, 2018
Devastating and True
It seems hard to get traction in wider media and policy circles just what a *giant* crisis is unfolding now, and for the future, in children's services. This article does the truth justice. Urgent, radical action needed. @louiseticklehttps://t.co/u7ZQxHZOP8 pic.twitter.com/ANqlCzbDcO
— Kathy Evans (@Kathy_CEO_CE) June 14, 2018
I would add reset of attitudes TO children’s social care @louisetickle “All this means that there needs to be a complete reset of attitudes in children’s social care, away from removing children and towards supporting families and their relatives”https://t.co/kxi08QddEA
— Debbie Key (@DebkKey) June 14, 2018
Is a 'news' report that is solely about a published family court judgment, likely to offer a balanced (let alone informative) account, without linking readers to that same open access judgment?: https://t.co/58Nisnqfvi @Telegraph https://t.co/op2UUcgcIS via @telegraphnews
— transparency project (@seethrujustice) June 11, 2018
Indeed there is. We all know, for example, he will not have been ordered to ‘give’ the mother £1.35m. He will have been ordered to buy a larger house (costing £350k more) which he will get back when the daughters cease full time education. But the Mirror left that bit out.
— pjm1kbw (@pjm1kbw) June 11, 2018
NEWLY PUBLISHED CASES FOR EXPLANATION OR COMMENT
We’ve not covered any recently published cases but noted this one to watch, involving a reminder that the term ‘disclosure’ must not be used to describe what a child tells someone (/ alleges) about abuse, and that investigations into allegations must not simply proceed as if true.
Court confirms (again!) the word 'disclosure' is NOT to be used to describe a child's allegations and investigations into those allegations must NOT then proceed on basis they are true. Hopefully summary of judgment will be published soon.
— Sarah Phillimorovitch (@SVPhillimore) June 15, 2018
IN OTHER TRANSPARENCY NEWS
Court Reform and Open Justice – We summarised the published responses to the Public Accounts Committee’s Transforming Courts and Tribunals inquiry, including our own here:
— transparency project (@seethrujustice) June 12, 2018
Child Protection Conference 2018 – Still time to book for this Transparency Project supported conference on 15th September. Details here:
— Simon Haworth (@SiHaworth) June 6, 2018
Feature pic: Courtesy of Flickr Lauri Heikkinen via Creative Commons licence – with thanks