A regional daily which followed a judge’s instructions to report details identifying a severely disabled baby has been absolved after the child’s family complained to the press watchdog.

Amanda Mooney complained to the Independent Press Standards Organisation that the Grimsby Telegraph had breached Clause 3 (Privacy), Clause 6 (Children), Clause 9 (Reporting of crime) and Clause 12 (Discrimination) of the Editors’ Code of Practice in its reports of the case.

The paper reported that Jon Watson had been jailed for 12 years for inflicting grievous bodily harm on his 10-week-old son, leaving him severely disabled and dependent on 24-hour care.

The articles detailed the physical and cognitive difficulties the child would have to live with as a result of his injuries and also reported that the child’s mother, the complainant’s daughter, had been given an 18-month suspended prison sentence for cruelty to a child for failing to protect her son from his father.

The complainant, the child’s legal guardian, said that details of her grandson’s medical conditions had been published without the consent of his guardians in breach of Clause 3.

While acknowledging that no reporting restrictions had been imposed in court, family members had explicitly asked the reporters in attendance to respect the child’s privacy and not to publish his surname.

The complainant said it was insensitive of the newspaper to detail her grandson’s injuries and the struggles he may face in future, which represented a failure to respect his right to privacy and medical confidentiality, and it had subjected him to unwanted and unnecessary attention.

She also expressed concern that the publication of her grandchildren’s current address, their “safe haven”, had put them in danger and there had been no public interest in reporting intimate, sensitive details about her grandson.

The Telegraph said the judge had announced before the case started that all the details of the case, including the victim’s name, should be reported.

No objections were raised after he had asked the barristers if they had any objections to there being no reporting restrictions

The newspaper said the judge had acted in line with his clear policy to allow the newspaper to name very young victims in cases where their age meant that they could not be adversely affected by newspaper reports.

In addition, the Telegraph believed that a further factor taken into account was that the nature of the child’s injuries meant that he would not be inconvenienced or embarrassed by publicity.

IPSO said it had a “great deal of sympathy” for the complainant and understood her concern to protect both of her grandchildren from unwanted attention, but found no breach of Code.

The complaint was not upheld, and the full adjudication can be read here.