Am so very weary of family lawyers trying to object to the media attending private family cases we are •entitled• to attend, based on how supposedly special and sensitive they are, and that it's not in the best interests of a child for a journalist to even be in a courtroom.

Every single family court case is special, and sensitive, and involves children. By definition. But the state powers that can be exerted in every single family court case are immense. This is why the media's watchdog role is so vital.

A simple - if understandable - preference that a journalist doesn't attend your hearing is not a valid ground on which to apply for a journalist to be ejected from a hearing.

There are three grounds on which you can object:
a) that a journalist being there is not in a child's best interests - tricky to evidence (and you *have* to evidence it) unless, I imagine, that journalist can been shown to have sustained disregard for children's welfare...