Sarah Taylor
The Rt Hon Sir Keir Starmer MP
Prime Minister
10 Downing Street
London
SW1A 2AA
The Rt Hon Yvette Cooper MP
Secretary of State for the Home Department
Home Office
The Rt Hon Alex Davies-Jones MP
Secretary of State for the Ministry of Justice for Violence Against Women
Ministry of Justice
The Rt Hon Jess Phillips MP
Minister for Domestic Violence and the Safeguarding of Vulnerable People
Home Office
To the Ministry of Justice and The Home Office
Dear Prime Minister, Ministers, and Relevant Departments,
I am writing to follow up on my previous correspondence regarding the alarming dangers posed to victims of domestic abuse and their co-survivor children within the family court system. This urgent issue demands immediate attention, as countless victims continue to face breaches of their fundamental rights under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC).
Victims of domestic abuse and their children experience multiple ECHR breaches, including but not limited to Article 2 (right to life), Article 3 (prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment), Article 6 (right to a fair trial), and Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life).
One significant issue is that legal aid for victims of domestic abuse is still means-tested, further complicating their ability to access justice and violating their right to a fair trial. These financial barriers exacerbate the already vulnerable position of victims, leaving many without the support they need to navigate the legal system effectively. Mothers often find themselves in significant debt due to legal fees, leading to homelessness and severe emotional distress, which can, in turn, affect their ability to maintain employment.
The tragic case of Claire Throssell MBE, whose sons Jack and Paul were murdered by their father during a court-sanctioned unsupervised contact visit, underscores the catastrophic consequences of failing to adequately assess risks in domestic abuse cases. Within 15 minutes of contact, their father killed them. Claire has been tirelessly advocating for over a decade to remove the presumption of contact in family courts, as well as campaigning and successfully creating changes within the family court system, a significant effort that deserves recognition from politicians and senior leaders.
Additionally, the case of Sara Sharif highlights the dangers of the family court system. Sara was court ordered by the family court to live with a known perpetrator of violence against women and children, resulting in her tragic murder. The family court’s failure to test evidence of domestic abuse in her case reflects a broader systemic issue that puts children at risk.
The case of Timotej Borrett (July, 2023), a little boy who was killed by his father during a first unsupervised visit sanctioned by the family court, further illustrates the urgent need for reform. The court’s decision to allow this unsupervised visit, despite the father’s history of domestic abuse, resulted in a preventable tragedy.
Research conducted by Dr Elizabeth Dalgarno, Director and Founder of SHERA and Lecturer and Researcher in Public Health at Manchester University, emphasizes the long-lasting harm to victims and their health impacts from being involved in family court proceedings. Some of her studies include:
Health-related experiences of family court and domestic abuse in England: A looming public health crisis (2024).
‘Let’s excuse abusive men from abusing and enable sexual abuse’: Child Sexual Abuse Investigations in England’s Private Family Courts (2024).
Failed by the Family Court (2023).
Furthermore, in a collaborative study by Lancaster University, Swansea University, along with the Nuffield Family Justice Observatory in 2024, it was found that almost half of children involved in private child arrangement cases, are not formally asked how they feel about child arrangements, even though they are likely to have a significant and long-lasting impact on their lives.
This lack of consideration for children’s wishes and feelings reflects a systemic failure in the family court system.
The ‘Assessing Risk of Harm to Children and Parents in Private Law Children Cases’ (2020) report found that the court’s pro contact culture puts children at risk of harm, and that courts minimise, ignore or disbelieve victims of domestic abuse, and fail to safeguard the most vulnerable. The report found that the courts often assume that a parent’s involvement in a child’s life is beneficial regardless of the risks posed by abuse.
This underscores the necessity that child victims should be protected from perpetrators, and the court must cease to continue the belittling and minimisation of domestic abuse.
Children are supposed to be seen by the court as victims of domestic abuse in their own right. This was implemented in the Domestic Abuse Act (2021). Unfortunately, this recognition is often overlooked in court, while domestic abuse is dismissed as historical and irrelevant. The impacts last for generations.
Recent case law shows that safe decisions can be made, but only when domestic abuse is considered. All relevant evidence must be seen and tested in the family court, during proceedings, ensuring sound, safe judgements can be reached. This is essential as the judgements will determine the type of contact that will be enforced in the final court order. It is also important to understand that both parents must abide by the court order, so it is imperative that the court order is fit for purpose and safe, to ensure the safety of both children and adults involved.
Dr. Charlotte Proudman, has highlighted these important issues for many years, and as someone who has represented many victim mothers of domestic abuse it is vitally important that her views are considered in implementing any legislation, with her dynamic and vast experience.
Dr. Charlotte Proudman is a committed advocate for women and children rights, and she tenaciously works to protect mothers and their children whom she represents in family court proceedings. Please see some of her cases to show the importance of ensuring domestic abuse is taken seriously in family court proceedings:
Hannah Summers & Anor v Kristoffer Paul Arthur White & Ors [2024] EWFC 182
Re A (A Child: Appeal: Case Management Decision: Identity of Expert) [2024] EWHC 1669 (Fam)
Re GB (Parental Alienation: Factual Findings) [2024] EWFC 75 (B) (28 March 2024)
Re GB (Part 25 Application: Parental Alienation) [2023] EWFC 150
Re A and B (children: expert’s reports) [2024] EWHC 948 (Fam)
Re O (Appeal; Duty to Consider Fact-Find) [2024] EWHC 839 (Fam)
Griffiths v Kniveton & Anor [2024] EWHC 199 (Fam)
I would also like to highlight the invaluable work done by Deborah Jones and the team at the charity Resolute Women Support https://www.resolutesupport.uk/ , which supports survivors navigating the family court system as well as other areas of domestic abuse and post separation abuse.
Deborah’s advocacy and her work with numerous survivors provide a critical insight into the challenges faced by victims, helping to amplify their voices and experiences in a system that often overlooks them. She ensures that every survivor has a voice.
In addition, the organisation Right to Equality https://righttoequality.org/ has been instrumental in advocating for the rights of domestic abuse victims, conducting campaigns aimed at improving access to justice and legal representation, as well as highlighting the harmful pro contact culture in family court where perpetrators are continuing to abuse their victims.
Collectively, efforts to raise awareness of the systemic issues faced by victims in the family court system are essential to driving the necessary reforms.
The proposed Pathfinder initiative warrants urgent discussion, as it aims to address some of these concerning issues. However, I urge you to consider giving equal power and status to domestic abuse services alongside CAFCASS and social services. Empowering the domestic abuse organizations would ensure that they are respected and listened to, therefore the voices of victims and their children taken seriously. They should have rights of audience and powers to apply for court applications, such as section 91(14) orders under the Children’s Act (1989) to prevent perpetrators from taking their victims back to court once abuse has been identified.
This is particularly important as social workers are not trained in domestic abuse, and according to a recent BBC documentary (2024) there is between no training and up to 20 hours during the entire duration of their degree. The majority of child custody cases in family law contain domestic abuse disclosure.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cn4970jdgq7o
Currently, many victims’ disclosures of domestic abuse, including those of children, are often ignored, even in initiatives like the Pathfinder project.
Moreover, pseudoscience concepts such as parental alienation should not be used as counter-allegations against victims of domestic abuse. The Family Justice Council’s guidelines need to be further re-evaluated to ensure the guidance prioritizes evidence and facts rather than relying on a potentially harmful pseudoscience that can undermine the credibility of victims, and cause vital evidence of domestic abuse to to be refused and not tested in the court.
While the Domestic Abuse Act (2021) introduced essential measures to protect victims, the implementation within the family court system remains inconsistent. The new Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill, currently under debate, is a promising step toward removing the presumption of contact, but further action is necessary to ensure the safety and well-being of all involved.
I kindly request a timeline for the progression of these initiatives and reforms. The urgency of this matter cannot be overstated, and I hope to see meaningful changes that will protect some of the most vulnerable members of our society who are looking to the system for help and support.
Thank you for your attention to this critical issue. I look forward to your response.
Yours sincerely,
Sarah Taylor;
Survivor and Qualified Independent Domestic Violence Advocate IDVA LLB (hons)