Nicholas Crichton CBE, the family law judge who pioneered the UK’s first Family Drug and Alcohol Court has died at 75. Crichton believed that the problem solving courts, first implemented in America, were essential to the UK’s family justice system. Despite the courts saving the government vast amounts of money and delivering outstanding results, FDAC has continued to struggle for funding.
Crichton was the first full-time family judge to oversee child welfare cases in England and Wales. Researching Reform met Judge Crichton for the first time in 2009 to interview him in his chambers. Although our views differed at times, our shared interest in improving the family justice system resulted in a professional friendship that we will remember with fondness.
Nicholas very graciously sat on the panel for a debate we produced in the House of Commons about the Summer Riots.
His speech looked at alternative ways to approach vulnerable families and he talked about the benefits of the Family Drug and Alcohol Court. In his speech, Nick described the phenomenon of parents having more children as a way to try to get over the loss of previous children being taken into care and explained the importance of policies which work to keep parents and children together:
“Today I have been sitting in the Family Drug and Alcohol Court (FDAC)… It’s extremely hard work for the parents… It’s no good just saying that these kids are not safe and removing them, we have to tackle the core problem..
I have had women scream at me in court, “If you take this one away, I’ll go on having one a year until you let me keep one”. I have read a psychiatric report in which a mother said that “every time they take a child away the only way I can deal with the pain of the loss is to get pregnant again”.”
Over the years Nick assisted us with various projects, including an encyclopaedia on Family Law, coming on board as one of the encyclopaedia’s editors. We also worked with the BBC on a documentary about Phoenix Futures, one of the rehabilitation centres for FDAC. One of our favourite Nick quotes came from a meeting for this project. Nick was describing some of the conflicts of interest judges faced inside the child welfare system and he said:
“Some judges simply follow the guidelines with a view to getting promoted, even if those rules fly in the face of what’s best for a family. I refuse to play that game.”
When the Voice of the Child Sub-Group, which Nick chaired, wanted to launch a consultation about children’s wishes and feelings during child welfare proceedings, Nick very kindly shared his thoughts with Researching Reform.
Nick felt strongly that children should be able to contribute to decisions being made about them if they actively wanted to do so. During the interview he said, “Children, however young, are individuals in their own right, and we have a duty to listen to what they have to say… It is my experience that children are almost always very vocal and keen to participate… I believe it essential that children’s wishes and feelings should be recorded verbatim.”
We spoke with Nick again after the publication of guidelines released by the Sub-Group on children being able to speak with judges in family law cases. Nick was always keen to push the family courts’ boundaries in order to improve the experience for children. His efforts at launching FDAC across the UK resulted in several courts being rolled out across the country and his determination and innovative thinking won him allies in Westminster and elsewhere. Nick was a force for good inside the system.
Our thoughts are with Nick’s family at this difficult time. Nick will be remembered by Researching Reform as a rebel judge with a very big heart.
Researching Reform 
Can’t say I shed many tears for a judge who took 14 children from one woman one by one at birth and boasted openly of doing so despite the fact that she had tested clean from her drug habit and each year had begged him to be “given a chance”;
Devoid of compassion I’m afraid…………..
LikeLike
Yes, he wasn’t always so open minded, but over time I saw him change. I give him some credit for that.
LikeLiked by 1 person
From memory DJ Crighton felt bad about having taken 14 children off their mother. When he talked about this to 2 High Court Judges, both of them stated they had taken 15 children each off their mothers. This I believe is what motivated him to set up FDAC. I met him once, no spoof or bullshit, just a man sick of the system and who did more than anyone else to find a solution. What a tragedy he was a loner in this sick business. And a much bigger tragedy is the removal of funding for FDAC.
LikeLike
So Crichton felt bad about taking 14 children sucessively from the same mum ………..
Well he still did it shedding crocodile tears all the while I daresay !
If he rewanted to change things he could have refused forced adoption and given the mothers before him a chance to care for their babies Under a supervision order
LikeLiked by 1 person
i suppose its it is possible for a Darth Vader to eventually see the light and begin to do good. James Munby was another such person but why other judges with first hand knowledge of the corruption inside the System such as Justice Pauffley and countless others never joined ranks is greatly disappointing.
LikeLike
When Forced Adoption is Finally abolished one day they shouldnt stop there. they need to go back and look at the many cases where children are likely to have been wrongly adopted and take steps to reverse those Adoption orders and return those children to their own Families. thats what i would do if in Power.
LikeLike
The trouble is; they fear that by dislodging the basis on which their corrupt judgements are based, they’ll bring down the whole pack of cards down and they’ll be left with the Joker.
LikeLike
I have never met Nicholas Crichton, but despite his past actions of removal of children resulting in perpetual pregnancy and ongoing losses, he may have had a moment where his conscience awakened and where his understanding of the system was crystalized and his warmth for those of a different background to him was alightened. I’d like to believe this, but I have never met him and Natasha has. I’d like to have faith that his approach was genuine and with altruistic motives. He identified and publicly noted that:
“Some judges simply follow the guidelines with a view to getting promoted, even if those rules fly in the face of what’s best for a family. I refuse to play that game.”
That is a brazen comment to make and I cannot determine whether this is a his true approach or one to gain favour and popularity. What is important though from his FDAC legacy is that there needs to be a heart and soul approach, focused on solving problems in a supportive way, with awareness of socio-economic bias and with children and families at the heart. This approach will fail if judges do not have this internalised and put their own interests, ie their own egos and career progression to one side.
At a recent case with again a very well known High Court judge reference in which very real concerns regarding a Psychologist were raised. In examining his reports from numerous women the local press had discovered had cut and paste reports leading to the removal of children from mothers. It was said to him all you need to do is ‘google’ it. (This has since been removed and it was unlikely prompted by the Psychologist). It was then commented that this Psychologist had made a series of errors that would totally nullify another of his reports. This High Court Judge then heard the report be dissected and made invalid. The case was then passed to a HHJ in order to be ‘re-heard’ by a newly appointed, not very bright, but very compliant and eager to please his masters above judge. He prevented the report being challenged, but was eager to know why there was such an approach. He was playing the game and placing his own desires above the children in this case which has lead to harm that they are meant to prevent and risk assess.
So before we have a more appropriate system; ie non-adversarial and more problem based etc. We need to have the right kind of judiciary.
LikeLike
Hi anon, thank you for your comment. Nick’s comment was made during a private meeting with myself and a producer. It was never on the record. I publish it now as he has passed away. We spoke a lot and I like to think that the things I, and I’m sure many others shared with him, shifted his thinking over time.
LikeLike
Pingback: From FB: 91% of parents say they are bullied in court by judges | MaryGSykes.com