Domestic abuse has long been recognised in UK law as a serious threat to the safety and well-being of adults and children. Yet new research shows a troubling gap between what the law intends and how the Family Court system operates in practice. The latest findings from academics at Loughborough University and the Domestic Abuse Commissioner make one thing clear: domestic abuse is not an exception in Family Court proceedings; it is routine. The system, however, is still responding as if it were incidental.
This matters because Family Courts play a decisive role in shaping children’s lives, particularly through decisions on child arrangement orders. These orders determine where a child lives and how they spend time with each parent. In theory, UK law places the child’s welfare as the court’s paramount consideration. In reality, the research suggests that this principle is being overshadowed by a deeply embedded pro-contact culture.
The Law Then And Now
Historically, family law in England and Wales emphasised the importance of ongoing contact with both parents following separation. The Children Act 1989 established the welfare principle and encouraged contact where safe, but it did not fully account for the dynamics of domestic abuse, especially non-physical forms.
Over time, the law evolved. The recognition of coercive and controlling behaviour as a criminal offence under the Serious Crime Act 2015 marked a significant shift. The Domestic Abuse Act 2021 went further, creating a statutory definition of domestic abuse that explicitly includes emotional, psychological, and controlling behaviour, as well as recognising children as victims in their own right.
Procedurally, safeguards were also introduced. Practice Direction 12J was designed to ensure that allegations of domestic abuse are properly considered before making child arrangement orders. In theory, this should prevent unsafe contact arrangements. The new research shows that these protections are often inconsistently applied.
What The Research Reveals
The Commissioner found evidence of domestic abuse in the majority of cases reviewed, yet in more than half of those cases, unsupervised overnight contact was still ordered. Abuse was frequently not treated as an active risk, particularly when it did not involve visible physical violence.
Survivors reported being discouraged from raising abuse at all, told it would make little difference to the outcome. Others felt pressured to agree to arrangements they believed were unsafe, fearing that resistance would lead to even worse decisions.
The barriers begin early in the process. Many survivors struggle with the c100 form, the application required to initiate child arrangements proceedings. Without legal representation, they often do not know how to frame abuse concerns in a way the court will recognise, or what evidence is required. Although legal aid is technically available in domestic abuse cases, strict evidence requirements and means testing leave many survivors navigating the system alone.
A System Out Of Step With Its Own Reforms
The findings highlight a disconnect between modern domestic abuse legislation and day-to-day Family Court practice. While the law now clearly acknowledges coercive control and the harm caused to children, some professionals continue to prioritise parental contact over safety. Physical violence is often treated as more credible or serious than patterns of control and intimidation, despite the law stating otherwise.
There are examples of good practice. Some judges and Cafcass officers are working to introduce trauma-informed measures, such as protective screens and tighter controls on information sharing. However, these efforts depend heavily on individual awareness and resources, rather than being embedded consistently across the system.
A Message To The UK
The message from this research is not that reform is impossible, but that partial implementation is failing children and survivors. The promised changes following the Harm Panel report have not been delivered at the scale required. Without systemic accountability, monitoring, and proper funding, the gap between law and practice will remain.
If the UK is serious about its commitment to halve violence against women and girls, the Family Court system must be part of that solution. This means reassessing the presumption of contact, fully embedding the principles of the Domestic Abuse Act 2021 into child arrangement order decisions, and ensuring survivors can safely and effectively engage with the process from the moment they complete a c100 form.
Domestic abuse is no longer a side issue in family justice. The law already says this. The courts now need to act like it.