-
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 Daily Mail – We questioned whether the Daily Mail report, Fewer women seek divorce as they fear losing their own cash in the wake of a divorce from a less well-off husband was based on an actual study / report at all. See Meal for Life…Again:
Meal tickets for life…again (our post about a recent article by @DailyMailUK
featuring @HallBrownLaw) : https://t.co/xnELG5DesB h/t @LizTrinder1 pic.twitter.com/RPEvpuM4j6— transparency project (@seethrujustice) February 8, 2018
Fewer women seek divorce as they fear losing their cash "a study has found". I do wonder if these marketing exercises would stand up to academic rigour.https://t.co/g3eib8JuLP
— Armstrong Family Law (@JonArmstrongLaw) February 6, 2018
No they absolutely don’t. Could @seethrujustice tackle these “fake research“ stories? Undermines ‘journalism’ and legal profession and public understanding of family law. https://t.co/OhzVWwdQwT
— Liz Trinder (@LizTrinder1) February 6, 2018
The Times – Appeared to suggest that their ‘campaign’ brought about the Justice Secretary announcement of a ‘review’ into ‘no fault divorce’. See Justice secretary to review divorce laws after Times campaign [our emphasis]. Others expressed a slightly different view:
Dear @thetimes some might say @ResFamilyLaw played a part too…. ! https://t.co/Jr2Y2xGsO2
— Byron James (@byron_barrister) February 5, 2018
The momentum continues to build. Where @ResFamilyLaw leads others follow! Lets hope that the Justice Secretary acts. There really is no excuse for not doing so. https://t.co/0EdRNr90Yx
— Nigel Shepherd (@topfamilylawyer) February 5, 2018
The NSPCC and others – Legal commentators questioned the impact of the language of ‘disclosure’, to describe child allegations, prompted by this NSPCC survey request. Mind your language. What’s wrong with ‘disclosure‘ and Listening to children and ‘disclosure’ at Child Protection Resource and DB Law explain why. We’ve emailed the NSPCC on it and will update when we can. (There may also be more on this via the forthcoming Transparency Project guide on expert evidence, the free public lecture on child sexual abuse and assessing risk by Jo Delahunty, and at Child Protection Conference 2018):
Two new blog posts on use of the language of 'disclosure' in social work (blogs by lawyers):@SVPhillimore https://t.co/uySQgcQfPM@dbfamilylaw https://t.co/BCPg6l0mpx
— Celtic Knot (@CelticKnotTweet) February 9, 2018
this has been a topic of discussion recently and we will probably do a piece on it soon. https://t.co/6E9EisJacI
— transparency project (@seethrujustice) February 8, 2018
The Guardian – Some asked whether this headline – Man accuses hospital of ‘rushing to kill’ brain-damaged son – went beyond the public interest in reporting parental protest against court decisions about medical treatment of their children:
It is understandable that a grieving parent should lash out, but this is an irresponsible headline that is unfair to the medical staff involved & unlikely to help public understanding. https://t.co/oVOBB4idlr
— Dr Hannah Quirk (@HannahQuirk1) February 4, 2018
We agree. The not naming in full appears pointless given the volume of material already in the public domain & therefore hard to justify. No such attempt to justify the decision seen in the judgment: https://t.co/XHR659esYw #thebrief
— transparency project (@seethrujustice) February 8, 2018
Transparency Positive
The Bureau Local (offshoot of the Bureau of Investigative Journalism) – Dug out the local stories behind national headlines that mattered, this week, following a four month investigation into local council spending.
Is Surrey the next council in crisis? by Gareth Davies, was the basis of the Times front page, Surrey, UK’s richest county, hit by £100m cash crisis. It also fed news and comment in the Guardian, BBC News and World at One (7:04). See also Councils “dangerously close to brink” as half plan to cut spending on vulnerable children from the Bureau Local.
The Bureau Local is a journo-tech team set up by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism (BIJ) to help local journalists interrogate challenging local council datasets for crucial public interest stories:
Here's our Surrey County Council cash crisis scoop as the @TheTimes reported it on the front page (£) https://t.co/GZvnhZpFmP
— The Bureau Local (@bureaulocal) February 8, 2018
Councils “dangerously close to brink” as half plan to cut spending on vulnerable kids https://t.co/fx13c943g6 14 MPs spoke about cuts/child services ysterday: –@LouiseEllman @JimfromOldham @RichardBurdenMP @AnneMarieMorris @ANorrisMP @gareth_snell @VotePursglove @KevanJonesMP 1/2
— Maeve McClenaghan (@MaeveMCC) February 8, 2018
Linker of the week
The Guardian – Linked their report of the fostering stocktake report to the report itself for their readers, and let them know it’s publication date:
Thanks @MartinBarrow @Guardian for linking readers to the published foster care in England review report. We've yet to see any other mainstream news publication do so:
Fostering review: Treat carers as the experts they are https://t.co/7kLeNYegvn— transparency project (@seethrujustice) February 7, 2018
BBC News – Linked their report on a funding crisis in councils to the local government finance survey and other source material:
Thanks @BBCNews for linking readers directly to the State of Local Government Finance Survey and other primary sources discussed https://t.co/8rryqwKz5s
— transparency project (@seethrujustice) February 8, 2018
NEWLY PUBLISHED CASES FOR EXPLANATION OR COMMENT
J (Children) [2018] EWCA Civ 115 (06 February 2018) – The Court of Appeal examined the issue of unrepresented litigants cross-examining alleged victims, including as to rights of audience of Mckenzie Friends. See Child contact, non-molestation and mckenzie friends at Suespicious Minds:
Cross-examining alleged victim without a lawyer https://t.co/kwtvb0FIbL
— suesspicious minds (@suesspiciousmin) February 8, 2018
HB Care and Placement Orders – Judgment from a legally ‘ordinary’ family court case (plainly of the highest importance to the family concerned), which (unusually) included the ‘transparency’ decision making: This judgment is one which in accordance with the President’s Guidance on Publication of Judgments would normally fall to be published. I will listen to any representations in respect of the publication of this judgment and, if it is to be published, whether any further anonymisation of this transcript would be required for that purpose.
HB Care & Placement Orders: https://t.co/FAD6P7eKax Helpful, explicit, judicial 'transparency workings'-para 125: 'This judgment..in accordance w [the guidance] wld normally fall 2 b published. I will listen 2 any reps [on] publictn..&..whether..further anonymisation..required'
— transparency project (@seethrujustice) February 7, 2018
IN OTHER TRANSPARENCY NEWS
A government review into sustaining the newspaper industry – The Prime Minister announced a review of options to sustain the national and local press, provoking a range of responses. Here’s a few from the Times; the Guardian; BBC News; the Radio 4 Media Show (with Matt Hancock, Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport); Brian Cathcart; The Conversation; and the Cardiff Centre for Community Journalism:
Theresa May's sudden announcement of a review into the state of the press is surely designed to avoid Leveson 2. Even so, newspaper publishers are not too happy with another inquiry https://t.co/QdMir0cBll
— Roy Greenslade (@GreensladeR) February 7, 2018
Child sexual abuse and assessing risk – Jo Delahunty QC’s next free public talk at Gresham College London on 1st March 2018 (And catch up any missed lectures here):
These excellent talks are open to the public and free. https://t.co/1uvJWDLWAT
— transparency project (@seethrujustice) February 8, 2018
Child Protection Conference 2019 – Will take place on 15th September at a London venue exploring risk of future emotional harm as a basis for removing children from parents:
SAVE THE DATE! #CPCONF2018 Saturday September 15th, London venue. Risk of future emotional harm – an acceptable basis to remove children from their parents? Speakers to be confirmed @seethrujustice @JerryLonsdale1 @survivecourt @DrLaurenDevine @Stephen3Parker @Yellowbikergirl
— Sarah Phillimore (@SVPhillimore) February 6, 2018
Parental Alienation: Understanding, assessment and intervention for children and families – BPSLearning approved training in London on May 10th for social workers, FCAs, psychologists, counsellors, psychotherapists, Guardians and anyone who works with children and families.
Parental Alienation: @BPSLearning approved CPD in London May 10th – for social workers, FCAs, psychologists, counsellors, psychotherapists, Guardians – anyone who works with children and families. https://t.co/DHNRjxb4bj
— Fam Psych Solutions (@fps_cic) February 7, 2018
News publishing in the digital age – What role for regulation? – A free City University and Impress joint event on 19th February 2018. Booking required.
How should we, the digital media, be regulated? This lecture, on 19th February, with the chair of IMPRESS, offers one path. Free, but you need to book. https://t.co/dItk4cr4BU pic.twitter.com/1Mija9exTQ
— The Bureau (@TBIJ) February 6, 2018
Feature pic: Courtesy of Flickr Lauri Heikkinenon via Creative Commons licence – with thanks