I commend the Law Journal for the recent attention paid in these pages to the issue of in camera interviews with children in custody cases. Though respecting the privacy of litigants in family law matters is critical, more public attention ought to be paid to the complicated legal and policy questions that often arise in them.
So far, your commentators have omitted a key consideration in the debate over whether a judge ought to have a conversation with a child when the contents are sealed: the non-evidentiary benefits of such a procedure to the child herself. As a former attorney-for-the-child, a current Family Court judge—and a citizen—I find the benefits to be enormous.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
