Analysis Private Client The family courts and why Paul McCartney should reveal all By The Lawyer 25 February 2008 00:47 16 December 2015 23:57 Sign in or register to continue reading. It's FREE Sign in Email Password Keep me logged in Forgot your password? Not registered? It's FREE! Register now Register with The Lawyer Charles Williams 25 February 2008 at 13:14 Secrecy Does Not Protect Children There is an assumption that family court secrecy is necessary to protect children – but rarely will you ever hear how, exactly, children are protected by secrecy. In my view, secrecy does not protect children. It makes them more vulnerable. Furthermore, when, for example, men are accused of sex crimes (falsely or otherwise) their identities can be publicised everywhere regardless of how this might impact on children. Thus, family court secrecy is really about protecting the state, not the children. Reply Link Mike Ellis 25 February 2008 at 20:05 A new family courts pilot scheme poses more questions than it answers. We, who deal with this subject on a daily basis can only but hope that when Sir Paul’s case is over he will see the need to champion a cause which seeks to preserve family life even after separation or divorce, that the courts might not continue to seek to remove the paternal side from a child’s life and deny them the very love they so much need in their formative years. Also to be raised is the reality that perjury in family law is not practised leaving innocent people open to the lack of a fair trial and as such is in clear breach of the Human Rights Act article 6. http://www.nscfc.com Reply Link Felisa Johnson 27 February 2008 at 19:03 Family Court Secrecy in the US It is not true, as Katy Dowell wrote, quoting James Stewart, “All family proceedings in the US are held in the public eye”. There is an entire arm of the justice system operating as Juvenile Courts that are closed to the public. This system hears all manner of cases involving children, such as guardianship/parentage/some custody issues, abuse, neglect, truancy, criminal matters, etc. that involve the lives of children and the family that they live with. The universal standard in the US when an issue surrounding a child arises is “best interest” of the child. A matter such as Mr. McCartney’s would probably be held in open court, since there are no children involved. However, motions to keep the finances sealed (closed to the public) would probably be successful. Reply Link Name Email Cancel reply Threaded commenting powered by interconnect/it code.