Be careful of the source here. Booker is variously a climate change denier and professional contrarian. He's very smart, but one of those iconoclasts who does get on a high horse. In this case it's worth knowing that he has been crusading against family and other civil court secrecy and rulings for years. ANd it's a worthy cause, but he's nt the world's most level headed journalist: hes sceptical of very reasonable judgements, like 99% of scientists re climate, for example.

In this case, some of his cases (and there are many articles, and they are worth a read) appear to be for good reason, and rthere will be some substance to some of them; but we don't know - which is partly why he rails against them. However, it is clear that he doesn't bring all the facts to our attention (like why the authorities may have had courts rule against unfit, manipulative and dangerous family members). Nonetheless, there is likely significant merit in at least some of his qualms.

Dig deeper using other sources, before coming to premature judgements. These stories are designed, DailyFail-style, to tug at your heartstrings. It's also worth knowing that The Daily Telegraph has always been the UK Rightwing broadsheet, but has since its change of ownership in recent years, turned more to Daily Mail-like reporting and sensationalism. IT has also taken a hard turn to the neoliberal Far-Right (think Brexit), and so you should take its stories with as much caution as perhaps the 'Washington Times', and worse than Murdoch's WSJ. It's not yet as bad as Beitbart, as it still advertises to octogenarian Colonels in Tunbridge Wells, but that may change.