The judge thought it in the public interest to give the case widepublicity in order that the lessons can be as widely learned aspossible, but accepted representations that naming the council couldlead to the identification of the child. This has been reinforced by aninjunction served on Children Now and other media organisations toprevent the publication of any identifying details.
Of course, Mr Justice McFarlane is absolutely right to protect theprivacy of the family and child involved, but in preventing the namingof the council he is also allowing it to escape scrutiny and publicaccountability.
Even if it is well-intentioned, the consequences of secrecy are rarelybeneficial.
Register Now to Continue Reading
Thank you for visiting Children & Young People Now and making use of our archive of more than 60,000 expert features, topics hubs, case studies and policy updates. Why not register today and enjoy the following great benefits:
What's Included
-
Free access to 4 subscriber-only articles per month
-
Email newsletter providing advice and guidance across the sector
Already have an account? Sign in here
