Who’s behind Pink Tape?

lucy reedPink Tape is written by Lucy Reed, a family law barrister and mediator *waves*. On this blog you will see me identified as ‘Familoo’ (a concatenation of ‘family’ and ‘Loo’. A moment of poor judgment right there). I have been at the family bar for over a decade and am still amazed at how little most people understand about the work that I do and what goes on inside the Family Courts.

Since summer 2008 when I made my escape from the big smoke and back to my roots in the West Country I have been a member of St John’s Chambers in Bristol. Best move I ever made…

According to the Legal 500 2011 I have an “impressive ability to get to the crux of a complicated and messy dispute”. That’s a euphemism for a lawyer who verbalises what she thinks a bit too readily. In 2012 they said I was “a strong advocate and hardworking” (transl. : “WILL NOT SHUT the flip UP!”). In 2013 they said that I was “excellent on complex and tricky cases”.

I am also the author of Family Courts Without a Lawyer – A Handbook for Litigants in Person. If you are really that interested in my CV you can read it elsewhere.

About the blog

Pink Tape is not just about family law: I post about what interests me and whilst that is largely family law, it also includes non-family legal stuff, non-legal family stuff and stuff totally unrelated to either law or family.

I’d love to think that this blog will persuade at least one person we aren’t all the money hungry sharks you think we are. Some of us are quite nice really. And I’d like to think that I can provide some useful information about family law for those working in the area without getting too heavy or boring.

An emerging purpose behind the blog is to enhance the quality of public information and debate about legal matters. There is some great journalism out there, from law reporting and legal commentary to simple reporting of legal stories. But there is also some terrible, sloppy, malicious and inaccurate journalism. They should know better and do better.

Not everyone likes Pink Tape or family lawyers in general. Some of the people who have given it the thumbs up are Law Actually (Blawggies 2010 – Best Legal Commentary), The Times (top legal Blogger March 2011), and The Guardian (“one of the best legal bloggers for style and content” May 2011). Pink Tape has recently become a part of the Guardian Legal Network. In October 2012 I won the Jordans Family Law Readers Commentary Award for my “entertaining and informative” blog, having been shortlisted for the Family Law Most Innovative Family Lawyer award two years running.

Rules of the blog

Of course, everything on the blog is suitably anonymised (or made up) so that nobody (including me) gets into hot water. Where necessary I have tweaked facts to ensure that individual cases are not identifiable. I will not post comments that in my opinion offend against the law in respect of the privacy of family proceedings. Individuals involved in proceedings will not be identified by me or in comments unless they have been identified in a published judgment.

I will not publish anything which I think might have potential to be defamatory. I don’t have time to research every assertion made in a comment – so I have to adopt a cautious approach in order to avoid (hopefully) costly legal proceedings or nasty threatening letters. If you are confident it’s not defamatory you are free to publish it yourself elsewhere at your own risk.

Nothing in this blog is intended to constitute or be taken as legal advice, so please don’t treat it as such. You may think it applies to your particular circumstances but it almost certainly doesn’t and I cannot accept responsibility for any reliance you may place upon its contents. The information contained on the blog is as up to date and accurate as I can make it given my other commitments – Pink Tape is a hobby which I fit in as and when. This means I cannot and do not cover all changes to the law or update information that becomes outdated or obsolete.

And of course I cannot be responsible for the content of sites linked to from this blog, either in terms of their accuracy or the views expressed on them.

Moderation – Unfortunately I’ve had to start moderating comments on this blog. Please be assured I don’t plan to block sensible contributions to a discussion, whether the contributors agree with me or not – but I will weed out comments that are seeking to exploit this blog as a forum to air their own negative views about lawyers in a repetitive or offensive manner. I will try and moderate as quickly as possible. Occasionally something gets lost in spam and disappears into the ether. It is not a conspiracy.

Right of Reply – I try to be careful and fair with my posts on this blog and try to avoid causing upset to individuals, but if there is any post concerning you as an individual that contains an inaccuracy or mistake that you would like me to correct please post a comment and I will give you a right of reply. I will usually only edit or reject comments that contain offensive material or material which the law or rules of court prevent me from publishing.

Please feel free to email me with suggestions for topics I could cover or blog posts you’d like to see (email: familoo at pinktape dot co dot uk).

Share this blogpost

9 thoughts on “About

  1. […] Lucy Reed sensed a chill in the air, as did Obiter J, who has written consistently on the topic. Andrew Sharpe wasn’t losing any sleep over it, though felt there was more to think about for commercial bloggers. Paul Bernal recommended keeping vigilant, and blamed the threat of regulation on bad behaviour by the press. […]

  2. […] know about the practice of family law in more detail the best place to start would probably be with Pink Tape, written by the Bristol based family law barrister Lucy Reed. Her posts range from mildly whimsical […]

  3. Family Courts… are these the same Family Courts that Christopher Booker et al have been dragging into the spotlight recently?

  4. I retired 3 years ago having spent 35 years as a Social Worker in Private Family Law and also in Public Law as a Guardian.
    I still do some work in a Contact Centre and am concerned about the future of this provision. I think that arguably Contact Centres and Mediation Services do more for the well being of children than Cafcass.
    Whilst the funding for Contact Centres in these times of austerity is critical I see more and more expensive red tape being created by Cafcass for Centres and the latest idea of inspections by the Children’s Board as just another costly idea that diverts funds.
    Historically the adoption of the Guardian model for Private Family Law was, with the benefit of hindsight and in my opinion, inappropriate for Cafcass interventions. ‘Putting the Child First’ is fine as a slogan but in private Law it only identifies the issue. In my view a more hollistic approach is required which involves all members of the family. Whilst not perfect the family, it seems to me, is still generally speaking the best place to raise children whether it is intact or not.

    • In my opinion and my sons experience cafcass have no interest in the fathers rights and opinions they are all for the mother

      • I have lost contact with my daughter for whom I was main carer. CAFCASS lies/self-interest, court bias, gross selfishness of her mother pandered to, the works.

        But you know the whole system is based on divide and mi5-rule and that includes the playing of ‘rights’ off against one-another. I’m not interested in playing that losing game to the benefit of a cynical hierarchy, interested only in control.

        We need a return to democracy, common sense and reason.

        The whole political correctness phenomenon is just the same old divisive game with a ‘progressive’ label designed to destroy freedom.

        The father’s rights campaign is sadly a total red-herring… ‘move away from the light’ and see the thing for what it is.

        “It” is certainly is not out to favour women, simply use them to destroy their own families.
        [Edit Stuart I’ve edited your name for the sake of anonymity – Lucy]

  5. Delyth Rennie

    The closure of contact centres is indeed cause for great concern. The priority should be ensuring no more centres close (and those that have are reinstated). Many are run on shoestring budgets providing services that are incredibly good value. I don’t know about this proposal for inspection by the Cafcass Children’s Board, so if anyone has more information I’d be interested to hear

  6. I think the justice system is outrageous so the mother can use a child as a weapon and an obstruction to allow the child the right to see the father even though she has lied to the courts concerning abuse with no evidence say what she wants about the father of the child and cause heartache for the father and the rest of the child’s close relatives the grandparents and other family members and the courts allow this, about time the mothers are questioned and pay for there court fees may think twice before crying wolf make me angry

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>