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

We don't know who they were representing as a barrister in the family court though.

@place They get reports and represent dc. As you can see in this case. They don’t see them as a teacher would.

@placemats error earlier

I am assuming (perhaps wrongly) that the teacher is the mother (the one who did the abuse but apparently the spouse, the barrister did not stop the mother doing it). From the previous judgment it looks like a 4th adopted child aged 20 original said nothing went on and then agreed it had. The 17 year old (now perhaps 18?) reading between the lines for once stood up to his adoptive mother so they got him arrested and he went into care). It certainly looks like those youngest 3 were the children of the mother's sister. Not sure about the older 2.

It really does illustrate how terrible things can be for children in this position - they have lost a stable home forever and are now in the 4th foster home since about 2024 - the outcomes for those in care are appalling (more likely to end up in jail than university) yet staying at home would have been equally a dire choice. Both parents continue to deny anything abusive took place. The younger 2 children apparently only wanted the parents to say sorry and stop the conduct.
I am glad I don't do family law.

The latest ruling doesn't allow for speculation about the gender of the parents and are known as they, their and them.

@Xenia it’s why dd mostly does money cases.

Yes, it is so difficult. I remember by psychiatrist father once commenting that it is so hard because sometimes mild abuse at home is overall better for the children than lives destroyed and in care although I am certainly not saying the children would be better off here still with the aunt (adoptive mother).

@Xenia Some children’s cases are awful. Even some divorce cases are warring over dc but there’s more money in money!

Their sex isn't disclosed either. I imagine people reading are making assumptions, but that doesn't mean they are correct.

What case are you referring to in this scenario?

@placemats Surely it’s a general comment?

What case? It was his general observation in the 1970s having seen patients for 30 years that sometimes abuse at home is the better of 2 bad options than putting children in care. I know these are really really difficult issues. I very much doubt he had some kind of list of where you draw the line of course as sadly for them social workers and courts tend to be the ones having to take those decisions.

The case of the thread seems to have been abuse so bad the 3rd youngest child at 17 fought back , parents got him arrested and then he went into care and then the one above him of the adoptive children changed his statement from there was no abuse to yes there was and then the 2 youngest children are the one in play as only ones under 18. So it sounds like they have been saved from a very awful situation and I hope being in 4 care homes in one year after living at home with a barrister and teacher parent but abused, means they feel they are in a better situation now they are in care.

Why is anyone surprised at this? I am just pleased that this has come to court, a lot of middle class abuse doesn’t come to light because the social workers or really the social work managers get bamboozled by manipulative people.

Naming and shaming would also identify the children and they are the important people here.
So I don't think their names should be in the public domain. I do think though that their employers should be aware and that neither is allowed to carry out their professions again

@StillProcrastinating Do you know anything about the judiciary? The judge is perfectly competent and since when is family law not important? Seems it is from the comments here!

This is horrific, I hope they lose their jobs and they are named so everyone knows who they are! I feel sick just read this! I hope those children are ok and getting the support they need 😢😢😢 makes you wonder what the teacher was like to their classroom kids

@Londongirl8922 Why do you need to know the names of the carers? Inevitably the press will then find out who the dc are? Surely the dc deserve anonymity? We do so like a good witch hunt. It’s not good enough to say everyone must know. Why? The case has been carefully evaluated by a senior judge and it’s not in the interests of the dc for you to know everything about the “family”.