Many domestic abuse victims who flee dangerous relationships will end up in the civil family courts. Whilst criminal law in the UK has advanced in recent years, and made coercive control a crime, family law remains in the dark ages. Perpetrators use the family courts to continue their cycle of abuse, and the outdated system enables it.

The problems

• Adversarial approach

  Victims of domestic abuse get pitted against their abuser in a gladiator-style battle. Victims have not had time to heal; they are often dealing with post-separation abuse; they may still be in fight or flight mode. They are worried, stressed, anxious and scared and can struggle to prove their case. The coercively controlling, narcissistic abuser is calm, confident, and often charming. The adversarial approach harms the vulnerable; when a judge’s opinion overrides the evidence, it can often have an unfavourable outcome for domestic abuse victims and their children.

• Parental alienation counterclaim

  When a child resists contact with an abusive parent, then the abuser will jump to their go-to defence,

  “It wasn’t me – they are the abusive one, they are turning the child against me, it’s parental alienation”.

  Research by Professor Joan Meier (USA) and Dr Adrienne Barnett (UK) uncovered the true purpose of PA when used as a defence to abuse; a weapon to gain parenting time or custody. It is an effective weapon; it increases the abusers chances of success and therefore has become a lucrative opportunity for specialist PA lawyers and experts who exploit the victim’s trauma to bring favourable outcomes for their client.

• Judge’s interests & transparency

  If those involved in a case are members of the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (AFCC), or trained by the AFCC then this is a red flag for domestic abuse victims. AFCC members are generally parental alienation, shared parenting and mandatory mediation proponents, all which have been proven to be harmful concepts for domestic abuse victims.

  Undisclosed interests add to the secrecy in the family courts. Journalists have strict reporting restrictions on family court matters; the secrecy allows for harm to go unnoticed. Victims are shocked when they discover the horrors within the family court system; then they get silenced.

• Guiding principle/presumption of contact

  Contact with both parents is deemed to be beneficial and conclusive in many family courts. A disturbing culture of contact at all costs has developed and more worryingly, an approach of ‘if the child gets harmed, then we will deal with it’. Children are getting harmed, and years later, courts are still not dealing with it; vulnerable children are routinely getting ordered into emotionally and physically dangerous situations.

• Weaponized system

  Coercively controlling perpetrators repeatedly take their victim back to court with petty or unreasonable requests and deny their victim any flexibility as the child gets older and their needs change. Abusers make demands to suit their needs alone. The victim has no choice but to defend and raise action or watch their child suffer.

   “It’s their right to sue” says the judge, as the abuser gets a hall pass to continue the post-separation abuse. The unfairness of it all psychologically tortures the domestic abuse victim.

• Misconduct

  Welfare reporters and judges can have a personal bias; they can have extreme and misogynistic views, and those views can cause some to reconstruct the narrative of the case from an abusive father to an alienating mother. Children’s views can get influenced and changed, oaths don’t get sworn, cases are left open without final decisions, and mandates on domestic abuse don’t get followed. Evidence of egregious abuse disappears from the record. Domestic abuse victims who feel they have been treated unfairly often don’t know if there is a route to complain; they are not encouraged to complain, and they are too scared to complain. There is a lack of accountability in the system.

The solution

Domestic abuse victims are being betrayed by the system they believed would protect their children from harm. The system currently incorporates punishment, threat and force, and engulfs victims in fear. It prevents them from healing and re-traumatizes them.

A system that uses early intervention from credible experts using a trauma-informed approach would help. Perpetrators must get dealt with in the criminal justice system first. Family court professionals must understand the dynamics of coercively controlling behaviour; they must focus on the child’s needs, not the parent’s needs. Due diligence must be made when governments make decisions on training. Transparency and accountability are required, along with an effective complaints process and the removal of barriers to access to justice, particularly when court professionals breach their code of conduct.

Domestic abuse victims and children are encouraged to leave their abuser and report the abuse to the police; they feel safe and protected when they do. They must not have this trust breached when they inevitably end up in the family courts. The civil law must catch up, quickly.