Charlie Gard’s case shows why our family courts must lift their secrecy | Louise Tickle

We heard his tragic story but it’s rare that such hearings are reported, even when devastating failures in child protection take place

The tragic case of 11-month old Charlie Gard, who died last week after a protracted legal battle, shone a rare spotlight on the role of courts in disputes between parents and the authorities. In Charlie’s case his parents were disputing the medical treatment their young son was receiving, or not receiving. Unusually for a family hearing, the parents’ arguments and those of Great Ormond Street hospital were aired in open court.

Journalists reported on every hearing. This means that the ethics as well as the legal merits of his family’s wishes, doctors’ recommendations and the court’s decisions were able to be debated extensively in public as each ruling was handed down. Last year, however, approximately 18 disputes relating to medical treatment were heard by judges in England, as well as a further 10 so far this year. All of these are likely to have been heard in private, with journalists not able to report the proceedings in any detail.

Related: Gloucestershire council sorry for 'serious failings' in children’s services

Shouldn’t we be allowed to report when a child protection team leader is reprimanded for acting unfairly to a parent?

Related: 'I had two children adopted without my permission'

Continue reading...

from Children | The Guardian http://ift.tt/2v2yDe0