Not all judges (or teachers) are nice people - a very sad tale from the Family Court (warning physical abuse)

[Another2Cats]

There was a hearing in the Family Court where there was a "Transparency Order" made yesterday.

Correspondents from the BBC, the Guardian and the Independent had sought permission to name the parents involved in a case where three boys had been taken into care after being physically abused by their adoptive parents.

The court very narrowly came down on the side of not naming the parents but did allow their professions to be identified due to the nature of those professions.

One is a primary school teacher and the other is a barrister specialising in children work who is also a Deputy District Judge presiding over family proceedings.

The press made the point that the findings made by the court cast doubt on either of them being able to carry out their professional duties in circumstances where they both occupied jobs that involved making decisions about and that involved children. And, as such, there was a compelling public interest to name them.

Incidentally, I must admit that I do very much agree with this point, the Family Court sits in private to protect the anonymity of the children, not to protect the reputation of adults who have had findings made against them, particularly serious findings of abuse of children.

The judge had even put their name to an email dated 15 Dec 2024, from both parents, saying that the family court has “nothing to do” with children’s welfare.

Reading this judgment was very interesting looking at everything that goes into making a decision like this.

Apparently they are both now facing professional complaints procedures so their names may yet become public anyway (the judge mentioned this).
.

But we shouldn't the forget the children involved, this was a very sad story indeed.

The couple had adopted the five children of the teacher's sister (so they were nephews/nieces). It eventually came to light that there was a "harsh and punitive regime in the home" and the Local Authority issued care proceedings for the three youngest children in early 2024.

The court findings included that the children were on occasion refused proper meals and offered only bread and water, while the pantry was padlocked.

The court also found the teacher often became angry when the boys’ household chores were not done to their satisfaction. On one occasion, they threw books from a shelf that hadn’t been tidied sufficiently well. On another, they threw a clothes airer across the kitchen while shouting “I am going to fucking kill this kid”.

During another outburst at the same child, the parent pushed the boy’s head into a toilet and flushed it.

The children were made to remain in the garden while locked out of the family home for extended periods of time. Sometimes they were made to stand outside without shoes.

During a holiday abroad, the teacher carried one child to a water trough and threw him in as a punishment for continuing to talk to his siblings after bedtime.
.

These are just examples, there are very many more examples in an earlier judgment.

So, just remember, not all judges and teachers are nice people.

Latest Judgment concerning Transparency Order

A LA v X & Y and Ors (No 4: Welfare and Reporting of Judgments) [2025] EWFC 126

And this is the judgment from back in December about what had happened:

A LA v X & Y and Others (No 2: Fact-finding) [2024] EWFC 365

not all of any profession are nice people

I get that “not all of any profession” are nice. But we put our children into the care of teachers. They act in loco parentis. So I do think this is particularly shocking and especially that it was their nephews.

the judge is an arse and probably got into family law because they weren’t good enough for the more high profile areas of law. What a dreadful person.

Hope they’re both named and shamed - as long as the victims are okay with effectively being identified.

That’s horrific, poor children. I hope that they are being properly cared for now, and receive appropriate therapy to help them deal with what they have been subjected to. As for the adoptive parents, I hope they carry the guilt for what they have done for the rest of their miserable lives.

I’m shocked. I really am. How naive I am to think those sort of people aren’t abusive

And evil people can be found in any profession, as this case clearly shows.

Your profession is absolutely no reflection of your ability to abuse others.
Im shocked that people are still surprised by this after so many high profile incidents concerning “respectable professionals”
People are people

I think reading the full judgement helps. I can see why the judge is struggling in this case but the future welfare of dc is definitely of importance in the judgement. It’s not the judge that’s wrong, it’s the parents.

Dr Jessica Taylor has written about abuse in the system a fair bit. The cafcass ceo objected to her pointing out that there will be abusers working for all levels. It is extremely worrying that they can't accept they will have people working for them that do not have children's best interests at heart.

I've read the entire judgement and fact finding, I can't see where it says X was the teacher. There are high levels of anonymity attached to the case.

That aside it's a horrifying case, most notably because the parents haven't challenged the findings, yet deny them and in an attempt to obstruct the case have said they don't want the children back.

Having been involved with family courts relating to our GD who now lives with us I can't agree with the poster who feels family courts are second best to high profile law.

If you think about the people who might be attracted to positions where they have power or have high expectations of others ,or think they can make a difference because they are better than others, or enjoy authority and control ,then it's obvious some of those people are attracted to that role for the wrong reasons or do not cope well when things are not going well and they are challenged.

Well they have to constantly dea with people who cause dramas in their own life and probably see them with mutable partners on repeat

Someone has to pick up the pieces of parents actions but therr is good and bad everywhere

Of course abusers can be found in every profession. The adoptive parents sound horrendous. I really hope the children get the help they need.

"... I can't see where it says X was the teacher."

It was in two separate places in the latest judgment. First at para 15 and then in the summary at the end at para 187(2)

"I am clear that X should be referred to as a primary school teacher and Y should be referred to as a barrister specialising in children cases who sat as a Deputy District Judge authorised to hear private law cases. That meets the public interest in the public knowing that the parents hold positions of professional responsibility in respect of children and were adoptive parents of a number of children."

Yes but you cannot say all teachers and judges are unsuitable for their jobs. Many professions have unsuitable people in them. Look at the church and the police. Dreadful people find a way! Always have and always will. A bigger issue is adoption procedures.

The argument about anonymity is interesting. I absolutely agree that the children should have their anonymity protected, but the circumstances surrounding this must be unique - a deputy judge /barrister specialising in family law, married to a primary school teacher, and they adopt 5 siblings who are her nieces and nephews. I can't imagine there's another family in the UK that mirrors that.

Those poor children.

I was bought up to never just trust or obey someone because of their position or role. That would likely be frowned on by MNs.

Yes it is. These individuals should be named. They have power over people which is not appropriate

Abusers won’t stay working with dc if convicted though.

It’s a very very complex case. It’s interesting about confidentiality but this was a consideration in respect of identifying the dc too.

I missed the possibility of criminal conviction but with people like this who have direct responsibility for children and their welfare both should be disbarred and named. Outrageous case

Thank you

@bombastix I think the judge’s reasons are sound for not naming. It’s a matter of opinion about whether you keep dc out of the public eye after a case like this - or not. I’ve no doubt people who make decisions about professional conduct will know and steps can be taken but a public witch hunt with 5 dc involved? I’m with the judge.

Seriously, both of them should be. The manner in which they conducted themselves in the FC is outrageous. Both of them are potentially still able to have a degree of influence over the lives of others. I would say strong public interest myself.

This is one of those cases that Louise Tickle has been involved with. I think she’s doing an A1 job on these mealy mouthed courts that are in reality, doing a better job of protecting reputations after the fact than the welfare of children.

@bombastix You need to read all of it. The case is very complex and not just about these parents and exposing them. The dc are being protected as far as possible but it’s a very difficult balance as the judge says. Who says the parents still have jobs or influence?

The mums who are trying to keep their children safe from their abusive ex's who the courts see as nice professional middle class men have been saying this for a long time.

Charlotte Proudman has been trying to raise awareness of this and how it affects mum's leaving abusive relationships

Frustrating how when it's a mum protecting her children the court refuses to believe a nice MC professional could possibly be abusive. The mum is more likely to be told off than see her professional middle class ex face disciplinary proceedings.

But yes, this sounds like a harrowing case . Hopefully press transparency will get more focus on some of the awful biases in parts of the family courts.

I have read both judgments. The fantasy engaged in is that these adoptive parents, who claimed their children were liars, who litigated in the most self serving victim lead manner, might be able to have some sort of relationship with their children now. The date of the judgment suggests that both the parents are still in their respective professions. I thought the argument of Summers was compelling. Both of these parents have effectively been allowed to emotionally abuse their children in the FC, and the idea that they are still in their respective professions is repellent. It is absolutely clear that the adults in this case and their needs are central.