Ending secret injustice in family courts

Hi Sparkies,

A quick warning before we go on – this story contains mentions of sexual abuse and rape. If that’s something you’d rather avoid, you can skip down to the yellow section, or I’ll see you back next week. Take care.

Imagine a world where so-called experts can say what they want, convince courts to remove children from their mothers, and have their word believed – despite having no proper qualifications, and not being regulated by any professional body.

This isn’t a dystopian fantasy. It’s happening right now in family courts across the UK.

Earlier this year, my colleague Hannah Summers published a piece about one such unregulated expert, Melanie Gill. Her advice had been pivotal in at least half a dozen children being removed from their mothers’ care. In the UK, only a few types of psychologist titles, like “clinical” or “forensic” are protected and have to be regulated. But Gill didn’t use those titles, and could give supposedly “expert” advice on the controversial theory of “parental alienation” without any regulation at all. 

The Bureau’s family courts project is one I find particularly impressive and important. Before I worked in journalism, I was a primary school teacher in Kent. I find it astonishing that an expert – who isn’t actually an expert – can hold such sway in decisions that shape children’s lives. It’s the Wild West. And vulnerable families are paying the price. 

You might not realise it, but a story like this wouldn’t have been published three years ago. It’s only recently that journalists have been allowed to report on family court cases, and this shift is monumental.

She investigated the case of a man who had raped his wife and was controlling and threatening towards her and their two children. Not only did Hannah report on the case, but – after careful consideration and with the agreement of his former partner – she applied to the court for permission to publish the man’s name. 

Family courts typically impose strict anonymity rules to protect children’s privacy. But, as Hannah pointed out, Kristoffer White was a serial rapist – he had a previous conviction for raping another woman in 2011. That meant there was a stronger public interest in naming him. You can read more about the reasoning behind this here.  

“It feels like we’re really pushing the boundaries in how cases are covered and reported. And that’s really exciting. I think we're going to continue to do that because, while others are doing bits and pieces, Hannah is the leading family court reporter in the country. That’s a real point of pride.”

Of course, restrictions remain – children and families are still protected by anonymity rules. But this project means the media can scrutinise decisions that affect some of the most vulnerable people in our society.

So expect to see more reporting on family courts in the UK news. And rightly so.

“I’m from El Bucha, a collective community in the state of Sonora in northern Mexico. In our community, every member has equal rights to the land – there are 77 of us and we share it equally.

In 1998, Fresnillo – a mining company – illegally occupied 1,000 hectares of our land without permission. For years, we couldn’t reclaim it. In 2009, my community presented a lawsuit against the company and by 2013, the court ruled to expel the company from our land. 

Fresnillo was ordered to return the land, compensate us for the gold they had extracted – 236,000 ounces worth more than £500 million – and restore the land to its original state. But they destroyed over 11 million tons of land, leaving massive open pits. It’s impossible to fully recover.

Since 2013, I’ve led our community’s resistance. Last year, we designated the land as a national park, preventing further mining under Mexican law. Now, we’re planting trees – 15,000 in the first stage – to begin restoring what we can. Our fight is about preserving life, dignity and our ecosystem.

The media has been crucial. National outlets like Proceso and international ones like The Washington Post, Forbes, The Guardian and The Telegraph have covered our story. Their support gave us a voice, safety, and visibility. 

Before media involvement, the government sided with Fresnillo. Now, they’re neutral. They no longer persecute us or assist the company. Twelve of my colleagues were once imprisoned over false claims, but that’s stopped since journalists began reporting on us.

I’ve spoken in the UK Parliament several times. While some MPs, like Jeremy Corbyn, show genuine interest, most listen out of duty, not conviction. I wish the UK government would hold its companies accountable for ethical behavior abroad. Fresnillo’s actions in Mexico – land theft and violence – would be unthinkable in the UK.”

Thank you for reading this week! If you want to hear more about TBIJ’s family courts reporting, Hannah made a podcast on the topic earlier this year and I would highly recommend a listen. It’s called Goodbye mum: the ruthless fight for child custody. 

TBIJ was able to make Hannah the first full-time family courts reporter in the UK because of financial support from our members and donors. If you support us by becoming one of our members, it makes a world of difference.

Have a good week!