Family Court Reporting Watch Roundup

by reporting watch team | Oct 9, 2017 | FCReportingWatch

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 Times – We commented...

The Court of Protection pilot – taking off before a flying test?

by Julie Doughty | Oct 4, 2017 | Comment, Court of Protection, Transparency News

Questions about the Court of Protection transparency pilot Since January 2016, what are (under the original court rules) ‘private’ court hearings in the Court of Protection have been held in public under a so-called pilot scheme. ‘Pilot’,...

More adoption or faster adoption?

by Lucy R | Oct 3, 2017 | Cases, Comment, Explanation, FCReportingWatch

“Delayed adoption is sure to damage a child”, writes Clare Foges for The Times (paywall). “Attempting to place children with family members has stalled the process to an alarming extent” says the subheader. Here we go again. For children who...

The muslim foster carer case again – what else has emerged?

by reporting watch team | Oct 2, 2017 | Analysis, Cases, Explanation, FCReportingWatch, Notorious

We have covered the case originally headlined “Christian child forced into foster care” on a number of occasions. Our earlier posts can be found here : Religious and cultural identity in foster care, 28 Aug The most secretive court in all of Christendom…,...

Let’s be clear: “Right to die” and “Withdrawal of treatment” are not the same

by Paul M | Sep 24, 2017 | Cases, Comment, Court of Protection, FCReportingWatch

The recent judgment of Mr Justice Peter Jackson that doctors and relatives do not always need to consult the court before withdrawing medical treatment from a terminally ill patient has been reported under headlines labelling it a “right to die” case. This is wrong...

Domestic Abuse – revised guidance issued – what does it say?

by reporting watch team | Sep 24, 2017 | Explanation, FCReportingWatch

Children at risk of psychogical or physical abuse must not have contact with parent, judges told (sic) This was the headline in The Times that arose from the publication by the President of the Family Division of a revised Practice Direction 12J (PD12J). PD12J is the...

The shaggy dog that turned out to be a woolly sheep

by Lucy R | Sep 16, 2017 | Cases, Comment, Explanation, FCReportingWatch

As long ago as April a number of lawyers began asking questions to clarify public criticisms made by John Hemming about a case dealt with in the family court. This week John Hemming has published a blog post which appears to be an(other) attempt to answer some of our...

Should I apply for an Emergency Protection Order?

by reporting watch team | Sep 16, 2017 | FCReportingWatch

We’ve noticed that in a recent post the Researching Reform blog has highlighted the fact that it is possible for a parent to make an application for an Emergency Protection Order (EPO), an emergency order that is usually only made by social services to remove a...

Hart Felt: (Non)Matrimonial Money in Hart v Hart

by Polly Morgan | Sep 12, 2017 | Cases, Explanation, FCReportingWatch

There have been a few articles in the newspapers about the latest judgment in Hart v Hart, a long-running case about the financial outcome of Mr and Mrs Hart’s divorce proceedings. Elsewhere on the Transparency Project, Mena Ruparel has criticised the inaccuracy of...

Sinister, Secretive and Cruel – A Fair Characterisation?

by reporting watch team | Sep 11, 2017 | FCReportingWatch

Lara Prendergast wrote a piece in The Spectator last week that ran under this headline : The sinister power of Britain’s family courts – Even if decisions are obviously cruel and unjust, the public is often not allowed to know. It’s kicked off quite a...