Only one problem.
Stealth for atmospheric craft is easy. There are two ways of detection, optical and radar (there's also audio, but we'll ignore that for now). To defeat optical detection, you need to have a paint scheme to blend into your surroundings.
Then there's infrared detection. You cannot fully defeat that, but you can reduce the risks by employing exhaust cooling mechanisms (Look at the Apache Gunship, the F-117 or the B2 for examples). If you're moving very fast, atmospheric friction will also screw you over, as the SR-71 proves.
To defeat radar, you can either absorb the radiation (heating up in the process) or scatter it.
Now. As we can see, stealth is a function of how well you can blend in with your surroundings. Let us now consider space. If our proposed stealth spacecraft is in front of empty space, it will stick out like a sore thumb on infrared, as it will be considerably hotter than its background. In addition, radar backscatter (which can only be reduced, never absorbed completely) means that you can safely treat any radar target you get as a threat (and micrometeorites are a large enough danger that you need to do that anyway).
Now, you speak of stealth fields and energy shields. Here's a hint. As long as you are emitting something, you are not blending in with the empty space surrounding you.
You can, of course, hide behind another celestial body. That will always work. You can't, however, hide in front of another celestial body (although it would work provided the distance between you and the target is big enough). All the emission-suppressing stuff you've been doing to blend in with empty space? Won't help you if you're hiding in front of a planet. You'll still stick out, simply because you'll be much colder than your surroundings.
Hiding in front of a star is easier as the star will blanket your emissions IF you are far enough away from your target.