Diary of a Lawyer: Domestic abuse and the family court

‘Parental alienation’ is a disturbing tactic increasingly being used by abusers in family courts, writes Charlotte Proudman

Domestic abuse is a deeply pervasive issue in the lives of countless individuals, leaving behind a trail of emotional, psychological and sometimes physical scars. Within the intricate web of family court battles, a trend has emerged – so-called ‘parental alienation – weaponised by abusers to perpetuate control and inflict further harm on their victims. There is an insidious intersection of domestic abuse and ‘parental alienation’ claims, which has become a tactic deployed within the family court system to the detriment of survivors.

According to UN special rapporteur Reem Alsalem, “The tendency to dismiss the history of domestic violence and abuse in custody cases extends to cases where mothers and/or children themselves have brought forward credible allegations of physical or sexual abuse. In several countries, family courts have tended to judge such allegations as deliberate efforts by mothers to manipulate their children and to separate them from their fathers. This supposed effort by a parent alleging abuse is often termed “parental alienation.” Claims of ‘parental alienation’ are often used by abusers to dismantle allegations of abuse and falsely paint victim-mothers as abusive.

‘Parental alienation’ was coined by Richard Gardner and supposedly involves one parent manipulating a child’s relationship with the other parent through psychological tactics and emotional manipulation. In the context of domestic abuse, this can become a powerful tool for abusers seeking to maintain control over their victims even after the relationship has ended – and perpetrate post-separation abuse. It’s not only the victim-parent who is harmed – instances of contact with abusers who’ve claimed ‘parental alienation’ has harmed children, and in some cases, child homicide has occurred under the current presumption of contact in the law.

The Ministry of Justice published the Harm Report in June 2020 which outlined that many mothers fear disclosing abuse because they may then be accused of ‘parental alienation’ and lose their children to the abuser. Which do you think most parents will choose – risk of disclosing abuse and losing your children to an abusive parent, or keep quiet and watch as your child regularly sees their abusive parent but lives with you? Many choose to keep quiet. As a family law barrister, I’ve seen this phenomenon countless times; one such case, Re GB [2023] EWFC 150, where I represented the mother, led to a successful appeal where the court’s clarified that an expert psychological assessment to decide whether ‘parental alienation’ is an issue in the case was wrong. This decision aligns with the World Health Organisation and the American Psychological Association, who have never recognised the term as having evidence to back its use or existence, leaving the question to the courts.

Family courts play a pivotal role and should be centring the safety of survivors and children; however, many judges and court officials still lack sufficient domestic abuse training, allowing abusers to exploit legal proceedings to their advantage. Abusers may use various tactics in addition to claiming ‘parental alienation’ when the survivor-parent is displaying protective behaviour, such as raising costs or engaging in victim-blaming. These tactics can be especially damaging, influencing court decisions and perpetuating the cycle of abuse. Strengthening protections for survivors and implementing training programmes for judges and legal practitioners can contribute to a more informed and just legal process.

Addressing this issue requires a multifaceted approach, including legal reforms that increase awareness among family court professionals about the dynamics of domestic abuse and ‘parental alienation’ claims. By exposing the tactics employed by abusers and advocating for legal reforms, we can work towards creating a family court system that prioritises the safety and wellbeing of survivors and their children. A broader conversation must be sparked about the need for systemic change to ensure family courts become a haven of justice rather than an opportunity for further victimisation.

Dr Charlotte Proudman is a barrister