The new research led by academics at Loughborough University – based on a pilot study across three Family Court sites which reviewed nearly 300 child arrangement case files, live observations of nearly 100 case hearings, as well as focus groups with domestic abuse survivors and interviews with judges, magistrates and Cafcass/Cafcass Cymru officers – provides unprecedented insight into the workings of the family justice system which has, until now, never been comprehensively collected.
The Domestic Abuse Commissioner found evidence of abuse within 73% of hearings it observed and in 87% of the case files it reviewed. Despite this prevalence, domestic abuse was frequently not recognised as an ‘active issue’ or taken seriously with regards to the type of contact children would go on to have with the abusive parent. In more than half of the cases reviewed by the Commissioner, unsupervised overnight contact was ordered.
Survivors repeatedly described how they were dissuaded from raising allegations of domestic abuse due to the suggestion that it would have ‘no impact’ on whether the abusive parent would be granted contact. Others said they felt pressured into accepting potentially unsafe child arrangement orders out of fear that if they contested, an even worse outcome would be granted.
The Domestic Abuse Commissioner also found evidence of survivors being forced to navigate the complex system without representation. Though legal aid is available for cases involving domestic abuse, survivors are often prevented from accessing this support due to the evidence required to prove they are at serious risk, and the legal aid means test.
Survivors who litigated in person shared how they struggled to put together a case and provide the right evidence, with one survivor describing how she was ‘like a rabbit in headlights’ and that she ‘said nothing for the first two and half years.’ Others referenced not knowing which forms they needed to complete or how to fill them in correctly, which meant they struggled to get their concerns about domestic abuse onto the court’s agenda.
The report highlights how outdated views on domestic abuse amongst some legal professionals saw physical violence taken more seriously, while coercive and controlling behaviour – which often underpins physical abuse and is an offence in itself – was frequently dismissed. This antiquated thinking, coupled with a severe lack of resource and siloed working has left many survivors feeling unheard, unsupported, and unprotected.
While the report exposes significant shortcomings in the Family Court’s handling of domestic abuse, it also spotlights how some judges, magistrates, solicitors, domestic abuse services and Cafcass staff are working tirelessly under heavy workloads to shield survivors from further harm. This includes ensuring trauma-informed approaches are being integrated into proceedings such as implementing protective screens to shield survivors from their abuser and limiting access to information that could be used by the perpetrator.
Despite these positive steps, the Domestic Abuse Commissioner is concerned that the level of reform promised in the wake of the Harm Panel report – which highlighted deep-rooted issues within the Family Court in responding to domestic abuse and other serious offences – remains largely unfulfilled.
With the UK government having set an ambitious target to halve violence against women and girls (VAWG) within a decade, the Commissioner is warning that urgent reform will be essential if the family justice system is to play its part in safeguarding victims and supporting the government to achieve this priority. She is urging ministers to publish the upcoming VAWG strategy so that this vital work can begin.
Professor Rosemary Hunter, from Loughborough University, said: “It is imperative that the review mechanism piloted in this study be continued, in order to maintain accountability, track progress (including the progress made by Pathfinder courts) and disseminate good practices, so that professionals working in the family justice system can better protect children and adult survivors through safer processes and child arrangements orders.”
Professor Mandy Burton, from Loughborough University, said: “This new research demonstrates that responding appropriately to domestic abuse, particularly coercive and controlling behaviour, continues to be challenging for the family justice system, exposing victims to risk of continuing harm. For the first time, the research identifies the scale of the risk, showing conclusively that domestic abuse is the ‘everyday business’ of the family courts.”
Domestic Abuse Commissioner, Dame Nicole Jacobs, said: “For too long now the Family Court has failed to adequately rise to the challenge of recognising domestic abuse within its proceedings and take sufficient steps to address the serious impact this is having on adult and child victims.
“No child should be forced to spend time with an abusive parent or caregiver if the circumstances aren’t safe for them to do so. But time and time again we see how the pro-contact culture and antiquated views on domestic abuse are contributing to decisions that put children in harm's way. This must stop.
“It’s clear that domestic abuse can no longer be considered a side issue within the family justice system but instead its everyday business that demands a rigorous response.
“To better protect survivors and deliver the reform promised, ministers must commit to a fully funded national roll out of Pathfinder Courts and the removal of the presumption of parental contact to ensure decisions are taken in the best interest of children.
“The government must also provide the necessary investment to extend the pilot study conducted by my office, to allow for rigorous oversight on the changes being made and ensure accountability from within the Family Court. Tinkering around the edges will no longer suffice.”