close
close

Press has now allowed reporting from the family courts

Press has now allowed reporting from the family courts

A man in brown shoes and dark pants and a young girl in a light blue dress walk hand in hand on the sidewalk, casting shadows on the ground as they come to the road

(Getty Images)

Journalists can now report from family courts in England and Wales in what the UK’s oldest family judge called a “landmark” change.

From Monday, accredited journalists can talk to families about their current affairs, report what they see and hear in court, and quote key documents – as long as they keep those families anonymous.

Family courts determine matters that have a profound impact on family life, such as deciding whether children should be cared for or supported by a parent.

The hearings are held in private, and although journalists have been allowed to attend since 2009, they were not allowed to report.

Monday’s change follows a two-year “transparency pilot” that started with three court centers and now covers almost half of the family courts in England and Wales.

Using the remote control, the BBC reported in many cases, including one in Cardiff Family Court Where a young mother we called Bethan had to spend £30,000 to protect her young daughter.

Her ex-husband, the child’s father, was convicted of many pedophile crimes.

The family court agreed that he should lose his parental rights over the little girl.

Bethan told us she thinks the new regime is “fantastic news”. She said: “Allowing reports in the family court sheds light on issues that the public should have a right to know about.”

Her daughter, she said, was now thriving.

“She has empathy and compassion for her little friends that simply couldn’t develop if she was brutalized in the way her father’s victims were. Thanks to the family court’s verdict, he has a chance for a full and happy life. “

BBC Reporting on the Bethan case was led by then MP Harriet Harman to campaign for changes to parenting laws – which is now underway.

In the future, no other parent in Bethan’s position will have to go to court to terminate parental rights of people convicted of the most serious pedophilia crimes.

The most senior judge in the Family Court, Sir Andrew McFarlane, said Bethan’s case was an example of how the new rules should work.

“If something isn’t working well, it needs to be called out,” he said. He said reporting and calling out such cases was a “healthy development,” adding that he “looked forward to more in the future.”

More Sanchia reports on family courts

Transparency resistance occurred.

In 2023, a senior family judge in Manchester blocked journalists from reporting the case.

During a private judge’s court hearing, Haigh commented on the new approach, which was published when journalists went to the Court of Appeal.

Judge Haigh said he did not support the “transparency project”.

“I have always felt that these matters are deeply private and my judgments are really for the parents to help them,” he said. “They are not intended for public consumption nor do they allow the press and journalists to further their journalistic ambitions.”

In the Supreme Court last year, Justice Williams blocked the publication of the names of the family court judges in the Sara Sharif case – although he released documents from the case to the press. It was overturned by the Court of Appeal last weekwho said judges should be identified whether they sit in private as in family cases or in public.

Some lawyers also worry that the new rules could have “unintended consequences.”

Alexandra Hirst, a barrister at Boodle Hatfield, a family law firm with offices in Mayfair and many high-net-worth clients, expressed concern that people would be reluctant to reveal their private lives in court knowing reporters would be listening to “highly personal evidence”.

“Regardless of whether posting names are not allowed, there is a real concern that there will be enough information available to work this out,” she said.

Sir Andrew McFarlane Head and Shoulder, with him standing in front of the shelves of legal tomesSir Andrew McFarlane Head and Shoulder, with him standing in front of the shelves of legal tomes

Sir Andrew McFarlane said judges were positively surprised when journalists arrived at the Family Court (Royal Courts of Justice)

Sir Andrew said he was not surprised there was resistance to the new approach.

“I understand and respect people would be resistant,” he said. “Change is change.” Many courts originally folded to participate in the pilot, he said: “He didn’t welcome us with open arms.”

Sir Andrew said that when journalists came to court, the judges “were very positively surprised at how relatively simple it is.”

He said the reports were “significant” and covered a range of issues affecting some of the most vulnerable in society, such as children subject to deprivation of liberty orders and cases of child neglect or abandonment.

He cited the case of little Elsa and her siblings as an important story highlighted by the BBC. In June last year We revealed that Baby Elsa was the third child of the same parents to be abandoned for seven years.

Many newsrooms are under significant financial pressure, and some have questioned how much family court reporting they can undertake.

Dawn Alford, executive director of the Society of Editors, said journalists’ freedom to report would be of particular value to regional and local audiences.

It was a “really important account,” she said, “that’s incredibly important to the lives of so many” that could help communities “recognize the role of mainstream media.”