Many of us had the experience as children of trusting an adult with a secret, only to have that person turn around and tell another grown-up. We usually felt betrayed, no matter how serious or trivial the revelation seemed to the adult, or to us in retrospect.

Children who are appointed a guardian ad litem, such as in family law cases, have the formal advantage of attorney-client privilege -- that is, they used to.

In a decision that is raising the ire of some child advocates, the Colorado Supreme Court has ruled that attorney-client privilege may be overrided in cases where a child needs protection from abuse, even when the child doesn't want the privileged information to be revealed.

The decision stems from a case in which a girl was allegedly sexually assaulted by her caretaker. The man was charged with a crime, but the girl reportedly refused to testify. Her guardian ad litem was pressed to testify on what she had said. The judge in that case ruled that the guardian could not testify without the girl's consent.

Child advocates frustrated with the Supreme Court's ruling have pointed out that while a guardian ad litem is intended to protect a child's best interests, he or she often acts as the child's confidant, someone the child trusts not to reveal information. They fear that children who are already reluctant to talk to an adult about their case may refuse to cooperate altogether if they are not assured what they tell their guardian is held in confidence. This reluctance could make it harder to get at the truth -- and a conviction.

Source: ABA Journal, "Colo. Supreme Court Nixes Attorney-Client Privilege for Children in Guardianship Cases," Martha Neil, Nov. 3, 2011