Something to ponder.
I was at a friend's house the other night where I was given a copy of a court case. This case is apparently being circulated among certain circles in Jackson for the sole purpose of giving everyone a good laugh. The case is a divorce and the ruling of the court spells out details that are lurid to say the least. Names are named and actions are described in ways which leave little to the imagination. It's pretty clear to see why it is being passed around as most people love to see other people's dirty laundry aired in public. Sort of the high class version of people who go to Daytona hoping to see a big wreck in turn one as they cheer the mayhem while drinking their Bud lites.
Any regular reader of this blog knows I am a strong supporter of making government records available to the public. However, when it comes to divorce cases, especially where there are children involved, is the public good served by making the details available to the public? In this case, the parties had children. There were no issues of custody as the couple had no children together. However, times and technology have changed. When I mentioned the case to a close friend who knows how to be discreet, the first thing she said was, "Oh, that is so and so's parent." While everyone at Bravo and Char are having a great time emailing and faxing the case to their buddies and laughing about it over drinks, there are kids who will probably suffer from the titillation of the gossips. It doesn't take much for a 14 year old classmate to access a court document on the internet, read the details, then put it on his Myspace or Facebook bulletins or email it to everyone around the school.
Yes, the parents made serious mistakes and acted in ways that harmed their families. However, is there any real purpose served by making such cases available to the public? Are we really any better off for knowing such facts when there is no crime involved? Because of the internet, perhaps it is time we started examining how much information is available to the public in such cases. Do we really want kids being harmed at school or humiliated by a sick peer? How strong is the public's right to know what goes on in court proceedings in such a case?
Something to think about.
3 comments:
Celebrities and politicians routinely seal divorce court records, partly for the sake of the kids. There was a scandal regarding George Allen allegedly spitting on his wife, but nobody could find out whether there was any truth to it because he kept his divorce records sealed.
I remember looking up an appeals court ruling dealing with a landmark divorce case relevant to LGBT issues, and was shocked to learn that one of the parties to the divorce was someone I used to know as a teenager.
Anyway, yeah. There are ways to seal divorce records, and every couple going through a divorce should have options in this regard, especially if they have kids.
I don't know from the post whether this was a reported decision by the COA or Miss.Sup.Ct., but I've long though that many of those cases go on and on through a recitation of wholly unnecessary facts--many of which have nothing to do with the opinion. It's just bad writing that could ultimately harm a human being.
Ugh. I believe I read the case you infer above . . . and dear lord, it's like reading a British tab. I'm not sure why it couldn't have been done with heavy redactions or allusions.
Post a Comment