There is a lot of twitter comment about last week’s Dispatches programme (for those who didn’t catch the show it can be viewed here). We have published two posts from members of TP setting out their personal views (here and here), but we thought we’d try and gather up some of the more substantive comment we’ve seen about the show, to capture both the positive and the negative.

Firstly, we retweeted a link to a series of tweets which showed the range of responses to the show :

Next up, barrister Sarah Phillimore criticises what she sees as the lack of balance in the show :

Anonymous Judge @judgeitis wrote this tweet thread, we think obviously a response to the show (or perhaps a response to the responses to the show?) :

Competition, EU and public law barrister Alan Bates @AlanBatesLaw has posted a lot of tweets on this topic, all quite critical of the programme – unfortunately they aren’t threaded and are mainly replies to other people’s posts, so we will just direct you to his feed here and you’ll have to dig them out yourselves.

Lawyer Ursula Rice @tweetygrafitti gave her ‘two pennyworth’ in a tweet thread here :

One parent described their teen’s reaction to the show as follows :

Families Need Fathers have a somewhat neutral post on their site here, focusing on the message that ‘court is the wrong place to resolve private family disputes when people separate’, and they sent us a press release after the show aired in similar terms.

Thecourtsaid blog wrote this post, strongly supportive of the programme and the issues it raised :

Karen Woodall, who describes herself as a ‘psychotherapist treating relational trauma in divorce and separation’ (but is probably better known under the more straightforward title of parental alienation expert), has written this post – not directly referencing the show, but given its theme of transparency and PA and the timing of it, we think probably an indirect response to it :

BP Collins wrote on their firm site about the programme, taking the opportunity to set out some tips from their lawyers and to explain the services they offer. They politely disagree with the level of criticism of the family court by Dispatches, saying it doesn’t entirely match their experience.

Surprisingly, there is nothing (yet) on Family Law Week, Family Law or Family Lore sites or the Suesspicious Minds. We wonder (speculatively) whether some are steering clear of a politically toxic topic.

There is also nothing on the Mankind, Cafcass, F4J or sites.

Obviously, we may well have missed things and there are many tweets from individuals we’ve not included here. We will update this post if we spot any substantive analysis that we’ve missed. We are unable to link to any material where in our view republication is inappropriate for legal reasons (such as potential libel or breach of reporting restrictions), so if you think something is missing from this list that may be why.

Update 30 July : Metro reports that 300 complaints about the show have been made to Ofcom. The piece includes some information from the show’s makers about why they didn’t include a father in the show :

The Transparency Project hosts posts from a range of viewpoints in order to further informed debate. As such, we will consider hosting guest posts about this programme, including those which don’t agree with the views expressed here (subject to our usual quality and legal checks). At the time of publication we’ve not received any requests to publish a guest post.

Full disclosure : Louise Tickle, the show’s reporter, is a member of Transparency Project. She has had no input into this post and The Transparency Project was not involved in the making of the programme.