Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS), Personal Safety, Australia, 2023, ABS cat no. 4906.0 (2023).
This release presents information from the Australian Bureau of Statistics’ (ABS) 2021-2022 Personal Safety Survey (PSS), which was conducted during the COVID-19 context.
The survey collected detailed information from men and women about their experiences of violence since the age of 18, as well as experiences of current and previous partner violence, stalking, physical and sexual abuse and harassment, abuse before the age of 15, and general feelings of safety.
Bagshaw, Dale, et al, ‘The Effect of Family Violence on Post-Separation Parenting Arrangements: The Experiences and Views of Children and Adults from Families who Separated Post-1995 and Post-2006’ (2011) 86 Family Matters 49.
This article reports on the findings from the analysis of data from two national online surveys (one for adults and one for children), which collected quantitative data and also allowed for qualitative comments about family violence and its impact on parenting and parenting arrangements. The study included adults and children who had separated after 1995 and after the introduction of the Family Law (Shared Parental Responsibility) Amendment Act (Cth) in 2006. The researchers gained the views of a total of 1,153 adults (90%) and children (10%). Some key findings:
•
For most adult respondents, family violence posed problems in relation to decisions about their parenting arrangements that had to be dealt with after separation and within the family law socio-legal service system.
•
In the adult sample, there were clear gender differences in the reported motives for, experiences of and responses to violence.
•
Women and children were far more likely than men to be victims of severe abuse, intimidation and threats, giving rise to fear and intimidation.
•
The most frequent complaint that men and women had about all of the services that they accessed post-2006, with the exception of domestic violence services, was the disbelief or disregard perceived by victims when they reported family violence, and a consequent lack of assistance that ranged from the violence and associated problems being ignored, to their being labelled as "alienating" parents, to being offered unsuitable parenting proposals (with a sense of coercion about them), to actual further harm. There were many reports, in particular from mothers, of inappropriate parenting arrangements that seriously compromised their children's safety, including arrangements that exposed children to serious psychological, emotional, sexual and physical abuse - mainly from a parent, but also from a step-parent or relative.
•
Nearly half of the children reported feeling "not at all safe" with one of their parents; nearly three times more of these children reported feeling "not at all safe" when with their fathers than when with their mothers.
•
Many respondents who accessed services post-2006 said they did not disclose violence to the court for fear that if their allegations were unproven they would be viewed as an "unfriendly parent" and the children they were trying to protect would be exposed to the perpetrator for longer periods.
Chung, Donna, Rosemary Kennedy and Bev O’Brien, Home Safe Home: The Link between Domestic and Family Violence and Women’s Homelessness (Partnerships Against Domestic Violence, 2000).
The research drew on consultations with 161 stakeholders (in domestic violence and homelessness services, police, courts and other relevant services) and interviews with 52 women. The study examines the trauma experienced by families in Australia when they are forced to leave their homes due to violence. The study found that many women leave their homes with their children to escape violence and when they do, they face significant social disadvantage (p46).
Douglas, H. Women, Intimate Partner Violence and the Law (2021; OUP).
This text explores the results of an interview study involving interviews with 65 women who had experienced domestic and family violence over three years. See chapter 3: Most women reported that the most difficult form of abuse they dealt with were forms of non-physical abuse, especially emotional abuse. Many women identified that non-physical abuse deeply impacted on their sense of self and freedom, and that it continued to affect them for years. Other forms of non-physical abuse that were also highlighted by the women included abusive tactics targeting their role as a mother, isolation within the relationship, financial abuse. The women in the study highlighted the particular impacts of non-physical forms of abuse, including isolation, financial abuse and threats about their visas, for women from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds especially those women with insecure visa status.
Hooker, Leesa, Rae Kaspiew, and Angela Taft, Domestic and family violence and parenting: Mixed methods insights into impact and support needs: State of knowledge paper (ANROWS, 2016).
This comprehensive state of knowledge paper is the first of a three part mixed-methods research project addressing parenting and abuse tactics. This paper presents the current state of knowledge on parenting in the context of DFV by examining the following four research questions:
•
What is the prevalence of DFV among parents?
•
How does DFV impact on parenting capacity?
•
What are the methods and behaviours that perpetrators use to disrupt the mother---child relationship?
•
What interventions exist to strengthen and support a positive and healthy mother--child relationship?
This review identifies that DFV may impact negatively on women and children and the parenting capacity of both perpetrators and victims is affected. Altered mother--child relationships may occur due to deliberate undermining of the mother’s parenting, and children are often used by perpetrators as tools to abuse mothers and exert control and coercion (p 2).
The report points out that violence does not end when couples separate. It specifically identifies the legal system as a tool of abuse used by perpetrators, and that poor understanding by legal professionals can heighten the risks for women and children (p 2).
Although there is limited information on the parenting style of abusive fathers, abusive men as fathers have been characterised by researchers and victims as authoritarian, under-involved, self-centred and manipulative. These men also engage in high levels of substance abuse. Children exposed to partner violence in the home by their father/stepfather are at heightened risk of child maltreatment including child sexual abuse (p 2).
The report suggests that supportive care includes improved understanding and collaboration between child protection, family law, and domestic violence advocacy services (p 2).
The report also identified issues with forced contact through court:
•
Shared parenting can leave mothers and children exposed to continuing abuse (p 26).
•
Post-separation matters, including negotiation of property, parenting and child support can be used by abusive ex-partners to maintain power and control (p 27).
•
Women feel pressured by lawyers to agree to co-parenting arrangements even though children’s safety may be at risk, or make decisions in an environment of fear, pragmatic concern, and family ideology (e.g. perpetrators playing on guilt about “breaking up” the family) (p 28).
•
Awareness amongst court staff in screening for family violence and safety concerns still remains problematic, despite legal and policy reform (p 28).
Humphreys, Catherine, ‘Domestic Violence and Child Protection: Challenging Directions for Practice’ (Issues Paper 13, Australian Domestic and Family Violence Clearinghouse, 2007).
This review of literature explains that issues specific to domestic violence need to be addressed if there is to be effective intervention for children affected by domestic violence. It identifies that women often fear having their children removed from their care because of domestic violence (p6). It considers how the protection of abused mothers may be linked to the protection of children (p7). It considers the child protection focus on women as mothers and their ‘failure to protect’ their children from abuse rather than on addressing the perpetrator’s violence (p8). It notes that sometimes the abusive father is missing from child protection assessments (p8). This paper notes that domestic violence is now one of the most common reasons for a notification to statutory child protection services. It identifies inconsistencies between family law and child protection approaches (p9).
Humphreys, Cathy and Monica Campo, Fathers who use violence: Options for safe practice where there is ongoing contact with children (CFCA Paper No. 43 – June 2017, Australian Institute of Family Studies).
The following summarises the key aspects of this paper:
Background
This paper responds to a challenge that has continued to frustrate workers attempting to intervene to support women and children living with domestic and family violence (DFV) – that the DFV intervention system (in the specialist women’s DFV sector and statutory child protection) is structured around women and their children separating from men who use violence. However, many women and children may not be in a position to separate from their abusive and violent partners, and some women and children’s wellbeing and safety may not be enhanced by separation.
Inquiry
The paper explored these questions by conducting a review of existing literature:
•
What is the practice or evidence base for working with families where the perpetrator remains in the home?
•
Are there safe ways to work with women and children living with a perpetrator of DFV, or for women and children who still have significant contact with a perpetrator post-separation?
•
In particular, whether there are strategies for working with fathers who use violence, that engage and address the issues for children, women and men who are continuing to live with DFV.
Observations
This review demonstrates that there is a paucity of evidence for effective approaches for responding to DFV in families where the perpetrator remains in the home or in regular contact with women and children. There are, however, a number of practices developing in these areas: nurse home visits; restorative justice approaches; couple counselling; statutory child protection investigations; and interventions with vulnerable families/whole of family approaches. All urge caution and all recommend a priority on training workers, and only ever bringing men and women together under certain circumstances and with strict caveats. This is necessary if work is to be effective and not inadvertently escalate danger and/or collude with the power and controlling tactics of the perpetrator of violence.
Conclusions
There is some experimentation with interventions in these complex family situations, and some early signs of success. The challenges of working with the diverse nature of fathers who use violence are significant. Nevertheless, this may prove to be an important practice development for future DFV intervention.
Kaspiew, Rae, et al, ‘Court Outcomes Project’ (Report, Australian Institute of Family Studies, October 2015).
The 2012 amendments to the Family Law Act 1975 (Cmth) ‘were intended to support increased disclosure of concerns about family violence and child abuse, and to support changed approaches to making parenting arrangements where these issues are pertinent to ensuring safer parenting arrangements for children.
The Court Outcomes Project examined the effects of these 2012 reforms on court filings, patterns in court-based parenting matters and the judicial interpretation of key legislative provisions introduced by the amendments’ (p vii).
The report contains numerous statistical comparisons of the situation pre- and post-reform. It identified that allegations of family violence or child abuse have been raised more frequently since the 2012 reforms. This increase in disclosure of family violence and child abuse was a key intent of the reforms. The presumption of equal shared parental responsibility is not applicable where concerns about family violence or child abuse exist (p xii). Therefore, a decrease in the number of orders for equal shared parental responsibility in the context of family violence or child abuse is consistent with the aim of the 2012 reforms.
A detailed overview of the prevalence of family violence allegations in family court proceedings after the amendments is provided from p 43. 36% of cases after the 2012 amendments involved allegations of family violence, compared with 26% pre-reform. The prevalence of allegations of both physical and emotional abuse also increased after the reforms, but this was more marked for physical violence.
The proportion of allegations made against both parents also increased (p 43). Other statistical interpretations of this data, such as the prevalence of family violence allegations after the reforms according to the way the matters were resolved (p 45) are provided.
An overview of factual issues raised (particularly how factual issues changed following the reforms) is provided from p 46. It is noted that issues such as substance abuse and mental ill health are ‘not uncommon’ for parents who use family law services (p 47).
Parental capacity is discussed in section 4.5 (p 89).
Kaspiew, Rae, et al, ‘Evaluation of the 2012 Family Violence Amendments’ (Synthesis Report, Australian Institute of Family Studies, 2015).
Building on findings of the Survey of Recently Separated Parents 2012, the Longitudinal Study of Separated Families, and the 2009 AIFS Evaluation of the 2006 Family Law Reforms, this report examines the impacts of changes to the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) in the area of family law and has three parts:
•
Responding to Family Violence - a survey of family law practices and experiences which primarily involved online surveys of the practices and perspectives of family law system professionals(n=653)
•
the Experiences of Separated Parents Study (ESPS), which comprised two cross-sectional quantitative surveys - the Survey of Recently Separated Parents [SRSP] 2012 (n= 6,119) and the Survey of Recently Separated Parents 2014 (n=6,079) providing pre-reform and post-reform data on parents’ experiences of separation and the family law system; and
•
the Court Outcomes Project (CO Project) involving:
◦
Court Files Study: an examination of quantitative data from 1,892 family law court files providing insight into patterns in orders made by judicial determination and consent made in the Family Court of Australia, the Federal Circuit Court of Australia, and the Family Court of Western Australia, including in relation to parental responsibility and parenting time (pre-reform: n=895; post reform n=997);
◦
an examination of patterns in courts filings based on administrative data from the three family law courts; and
◦
an analysis of published judgments applying to the 2012 family violence amendments.
One of the ‘Key messages’ from the report is that parents who use family law systems tend to be those affected by complex issues including family violence, mental ill-health, substance abuse and safety concerns for themselves and/or their children. This is discussed in detail in chapter 2. In particular, it was found that each cohort of separated parents studied had similar patterns of family violence (p 10). Around two-thirds of separated parents indicated that they had a history of emotional abuse or physical violence prior to or during separation and this continued for a slightly lower proportion after separation (p 10). It noted the ‘prevalence of physical violence diminished after separation, as did the prevalence of emotional abuse, though to a much less significant extent’ (p 10). The exposure of children to family violence for each cohort of separated parents is discussed at p 14. Chapter 4 sets out the evaluation findings on whether the 2012 family violence amendments had supported increased disclosure of family violence and child abuse concerns to family law system professionals, the screening and assessment practices and responses to disclosures of family violence and/or child safety concerns.
Kaye, Miranda, Julie Stubbs and Julia Tolmie, ‘Negotiating Child Residence and Contact Arrangements Against a Background of Domestic Violence’ (Research Report, Families, Law and Social Policy Research Unit, University of Sydney, 2003).
This report details findings based on interviews with 40 women negotiating contact arrangements with an ex-partner who had abused them and a further 22 interviews with professionals such as lawyers, counsellors, refuge workers and court assistance scheme workers, who had involvement with the development or implementation of contact arrangements. A majority of women (97.5%) had experienced significant levels of violence and abuse since separating from their partner. For many, this abuse occurred in the context of contact handovers. Women also cited occasions when it seemed that contact was used as a further opportunity to harass or annoy them. They expressed concern about children witnessing incidents of violence against them and circumstances where children themselves had been roughly handled during handover. 70.9% of women found it very difficult to disclose domestic violence to professionals they came in contact with, at least initially. Other women, especially Indigenous women, were reluctant to report the abuse for fear that statutory child protection authorities could take their children away from them.
Meyer, Silke,‘Responding to Intimate Partner Violence and Victimisation: Effective Options for Help-seeking’ (2010) 389 Trends and Issues in Crime and Criminal Justice 1.
The current analysis is based on data drawn from the International Violence Against Women Survey (IVAWS) conducted by the Australian Institute of Criminology (AIC) in 2002–03. The IVAWS was a national survey, based on a random community sample of over 6,600 women living in Australia at the time of data collection. Women between the ages of 18 and 69 years were interviewed by telephone and a sub-sample of formal and/or informal help-seekers (N=1,562) was identified (p2). The presence of children was also identified as a predictor of formal help-seeking (eg. law enforcement and specialised victim services). Children’s observations of violent incidents significantly increased victims’ likelihood of seeking formal support (p4).
Meyer, Silke, ‘Still Blaming the Victim of Intimate Partner Violence? Women’s Narratives of Victim Desistance and Redemption when Seeking Support’ (2015) Theoretical Criminology 1.
This article presents a theoretical examination of victims’ (N = 28) experiences when trying to rebuild a victimization-free identity after having experienced multiple years of severe intimate partner violence (IPV). Narratives reveal experiences of victim-blaming attitudes when seeking help from informal and general formal support sources, which suggest that victims of IPV do not meet the criteria of the ‘ideal’, innocent victim worthy of ongoing formal and informal support. Drawing on various criminological theories and theories relating to social stigma and construction of the ‘ideal victim’, the study finds that victims often feel they have to redeem themselves as worthy of empathy in order to access ongoing support.
Meyer, S, Reeves, E, Fitz-Gibbon, K. The intergenerational transmission of family violence: Mothers' perceptions of children's experiences and use of violence in the home. Child & Family Social Work. 2021; 1– 9.
Abstract: Intimate partner violence (IPV) on average affects one in four women, with the majority of victim survivors identifying as mothers in national survey data. Children experiencing parental IPV are now equally understood as victims. Extensive research documents the short- and long-term impacts of children's experiences of IPV on their safety and wellbeing. More recently, research has started to examine adolescent children's use of violence in the home as adolescent family violence (AFV). Contributing to this emerging body of research, we draw on narrative interview data from mothers who participated in a larger study on IPV, help-seeking and the perceived impact on children to better understand how mothers make sense of children's use of violence in the home. Mothers identified an emergence of AFV in male children with childhood experiences of adult IPV. Although mothers' experiences of adult and adolescent violence highlight their dual victimisation, mothers frame their abusive children as victims rather than perpetrators. Implications for future research, policy and trauma-informed practice are discussed.
Meyer S, Stambe R-M. Mothering in the Context of Violence: Indigenous and Non-Indigenous Mothers’ Experiences in Regional Settings in Australia. Journal of Interpersonal Violence. November 2020.
Abstract: Domestic and family violence (DFV) disproportionately affects women and children in Australia and globally. On average, one in three women experiences DFV during adulthood and the majority of these women identify as mothers. The prevalence of DFV is higher for Indigenous women and their experiences disproportionately range at the more severe end of physical abuse. For women affected by DFV, mothering during and post this type of victimization is complicated by strategic entrapment, undermining of the mother–child relationship, and threats of harm directed at children and mothers. While a substantial body of literature has examined the experiences of mothers affected by DFV more broadly, research on the experiences of Indigenous mothers affected by DFV remains scarce. Research evidence is further limited when trying to understand the specific constraints experienced by mothers affected by DFV in regional settings. This article examines the experiences of Indigenous and non-Indigenous mothers affected by DFV in regional Queensland, Australia. Data derived from 17 qualitative face-to-face interviews are used to explore the lived experiences of these mothers. Findings identify the immediate and long-term effects of DFV on mothers and children, including similarities and differences in women’s experiences of mothering in the context of DFV, experiences of entrapment in an abusive relationship, experiences of post-separation abuse, strategies used to mitigate its impact on children, and surviving as a female-headed single-parent household in regional settings. While mothers in this study shared a number of similar experiences, regionality, the risk of cultural disconnectedness, and socio-structural marginalization disproportionately affected Indigenous mothers in this study. Findings raise key implications for supporting mothers and children’s safety and recovery, access to safe and sustainable housing in regional towns, and the empowerment of Indigenous women to overcome the lasting effects of colonization and disproportionate experiences of disadvantage.
Stambe, R.-M., & Meyer, S. (2022). Police and Duty Lawyer Perceptions of Domestic Violence Protection Order Proceedings Involving Parents: Towards Greater System Accountability and Family-Centred Decision-Making.Journal of Family Violence. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-022-00449-8.
Abstract
Purpose: Domestic violence (DV) is a problem of global significance and remains a gendered issue that disproportionately affects women and children. Prevalence studies on women’s experiences of DV suggest that around 50% of victims identify as mothers. The effects of DV on mothers and children are well documented, raising implications for their protection. Civil protection orders are a legal tool used to reduce and prevent experiences of DV. Research on protection order effectiveness is mixed with research suggesting that the ongoing relationship between a respondent and aggrieved parent around child contact presents ongoing opportunities for re-victimization. This study contributes to the scant literature on the implications of protection orders on parental responsibilities.
Method: The study draws on surveys with duty lawyers and focus groups with police officers. A thematic analysis was used to examine perceptions and experiences of ‘no contact’ protection orders and respondent parent non-compliance where mutual children are involved.
Results: Findings suggest that ambiguous ‘no contact’ conditions and a lack of clarity around their implications for child contact play a key role in respondent parent non-compliance, ranging from uninformed non-compliance to the strategic use of children as a form of coercive control in non-compliance.
Conclusion: Findings raise implications for specialist legal advice and support for parents affected by DV to sit alongside protection order court proceedings. Findings highlight the need for greater system accountability to ensure court-issued protection orders take a family-centred approach that align with parental responsibilities and ensure child and adult victims’ safety and wellbeing.
Summers, A. (2022) The Choice: Violence or Poverty, University of Technology Sydney.
From the Executive Summary (pp14-15): The first, and most confronting, finding is that of the estimated 311,000 single mothers living in Australia in 2016 who had lived with a previous partner, 185,700 – or 60 per cent of them – had experienced violence (physical and/or sexual) by a previous partner since age 15. And that 71 per cent, or 220,200 of these women, had experienced emotional abuse by a previous partner since age 15. To put this finding in context, the PSS 2016 found that 1.6 million Australian women aged 18 or over had experienced partner violence since the age of 15. That equates to 17 per cent of all Australian women. However, if we only look at ‘The Choice’ that number increases to 22 per cent. For all women who previously had a partner, but currently live alone, the number is 40 per cent. But all these numbers are eclipsed by the startling 60 per cent of women who are single mothers who experienced violence from a previous partner.
International
Clements, K., et al., (2022) The Use of Children as a Tactic of Intimate Partner Violence and its Relationship to Survivors’ Mental Health. Journal of Family Violence, 37: 1049-1055.
Abstract: Although prior research has established that intimate partner violence (IPV) often leads to increased depression, anxiety and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), little is known about how often abusive partners and ex-partners use survivors’ children as an abuse tactic, nor whether this form of IPV also is detrimental to survivors’ mental health. The current study interviewed 299 unstably housed survivors of intimate partner violence shortly after they sought services from a domestic violence agency. All participants were parents of minor children. In-person interviews asked about abuse experienced in the prior six months, including the ways children were used as a form of IPV. Participants were also asked about their current depression, anxiety, and symptoms of PTSD. As hypothesized, the majority of parents reported their abusive partners and ex-partners had used their children as a form of IPV to control and hurt them. Further, after controlling for other forms of IPV, use of the children significantly predicted both increased anxiety and greater number of PTSD symptoms. Results show the importance of focusing on the use of children as a common and injurious form of abuse used against survivors of intimate partner violence (IPV).
Holt, Amanda, ‘Adolescent-to-Parent Abuse as a Form of “Domestic Violence”: A Conceptual Review’ (2016) 17(5) Trauma, Violence, & Abuse 490-499.
This article discusses adolescent-to-parent abuse (APA), varied forms of abusive behaviour perpetrated by a child toward a parent (p 490). Mothers are more likely to be victims of APA than fathers (p 490), and correlations have been identified between APA and abusive behaviours within a young person’s dating relationships (p 491). As a distinct form of abuse, it is not necessarily appropriate to approach APA within a traditional domestic violence framework (p 496). Responding to APA raises issues separate from youth crime and domestic and family violence more broadly:
•
Parental responsibility orders are inappropriate in cases where the burdened parent is a victim of the perpetrator’s APA, as such orders may cause revictimisation (p 492).
•
Attitudes that place responsibility or blame on the victim parent must be avoided, as they may lead to victim blaming in cases of APA (p 493).
•
The gendered focus on these issues should be reduced in APA cases, in order to properly engage with the child-parent abuse dynamic (p 495).
Jaffe, Peter, Katreena Scott, ‘Risk Factors for Children in Situations of Family Violence in the Context of Separation and Divorce’ (Department of Justice Canada, 2014).
This report provides a summary of the expanding literature in the field of family violence, with specific attention to factors that increase the risk of harm to children during the critical time of parental separation. The report also summarises policies and practices for intervention and prevention as identified by Canadian experts and current research reports. The review highlights the many factors that increase children’s risk of harm to their psychological and physical well-being (e.g., exposure to domestic violence; history of maltreatment; parental stress; social isolation of the family; inadequate resources and support) in the context of family violence and separating parents. The authors propose a model to guide judges, lawyers and court-related professionals to consider when looking at potential harm to children based on their vulnerabilities as well as the risks that parents may present. Findings of risk can lead to court mandated interventions and safeguards in determining parental access to their children. This analysis requires consideration of barriers to required services such as language and cultural barriers as well as poverty.
Simon Lapierre et al., ‘Difficult but Close Relationships: Children's Perspectives on Relationships With Their Mothers in the Context of Domestic Violence’ (2018) 24(9) Violence Against Women 1023-1038.
Despite a recent focus in the literature on mother-child relationships, there is a limited understanding of children’s perspectives on their relationships with their mothers. This article reports the findings from a participative and qualitative study involving Canadian children who experienced domestic violence, and focuses on their perspectives on their relationships with their mothers under those circumstances. 46 individual interviews were conducted with children to gather their experiences. Results showed that women’s and children’s victimisations are inextricably linked. Notwithstanding the negative effects of domestic violence on mother-child relationships, the participants’ mothers played a significant role in their children’s lives and had close relationships with them. Communication was also found to be an important element in mother-child relationships. However, several participants stated that the communication with their mothers was limited whilst they lived with the domestic violence perpetrator. As the participants experienced domestic violence alongside their mothers, the results also revealed a dynamic of mutual protectiveness. Overall, the findings emphasised the need for policies and practices that support mother-child relationships in the context of domestic violence, as well as programs that support mother-child relationships or facilitate mother-child communication.
Where domestic and family violence occurs in families with children, the victim is most likely to be the perpetrator’s female intimate partner and the mother of the children. A perpetrator in these circumstances is also highly likely to directly abuse the children or otherwise expose them to violence. These children are also victims of domestic and family violence.
There are particular vulnerabilities a perpetrator may seek to exploit in exercising control over the victim and children. They may relate to the victim’s sense of their parenting role, their relationship with the children, and their responsibility to promote the children’s wellbeing and protect them from harm, while also trying to cope with the dangerous and debilitating effects of the violence. These factors, together with poor mental health and social conditions that may be related to the domestic and family violence, may impact on a victim’s capacity to parent effectively.
Where the victim is the mother of the child, a perpetrator’s use of the victim’s mothering role as a means of committing domestic and family violence may begin prior to pregnancy, or may continue or escalate during and after the pregnancy. A perpetrator may, for example, control or prevent contraception leading to unwanted pregnancy, or coerce the victim into pregnancy so as to prevent her from working or studying or to otherwise exercise control over her; or the perpetrator may perceive that the pregnancy occurred sooner than intended, or suspect that he is not the father.
A perpetrator may use a range of tactics to undermine or destroy the relationship between mother and child. Depending on the child’s age, the perpetrator may deliberately abuse the victim in front of the child to induce fear in the child or a sense that their mother is weak and unable to protect herself. The perpetrator may discredit the victim’s mothering skills by accusing her of being a bad mother, or he may coach and recruit the child in the perpetration of the violence, or isolate the victim and children from family, friends and other sources of support and care. Over time these corrosive and manipulative behaviours may increasingly restrict and control all aspects of the everyday lives of victims and their children, including their sense of reality and their capacity to act competently and assertively; and may ultimately impair their physical, emotional and mental health and wellbeing.
A victim responsible for the care of children may delay leaving the abusive relationship, or may leave and return on multiple occasions before finally leaving, for fear that the act of leaving may risk an escalation of the domestic and family violence. A victim’s sense of duty to protect children from further harm may directly influence these decisions.
Research demonstrates that separation coincides with an increased risk of threatened and actual violence as a perpetrator may respond to a perceived loss of control over the victim with amplified efforts to reassert control. Importantly, in the context of separating parents, there is also an increased risk of harm to children's psychological and physical wellbeing due to exposure to domestic and family violence, history of maltreatment, parental stress, social isolation, and inadequate resources and support.
Other factors that may influence a victim’s decision to remain in the abusive relationship include lack of independent financial resources; lack of child care options, other than the perpetrator; overcrowded or inadequate shelter accommodation ill equipped for the needs of her children or animals; fear that parenting orders may put the children at further risk of harm by the perpetrator; fear that the perpetrator will avoid child support obligations; or fear of isolation, poverty and homelessness. These factors may in turn serve to increase the level of control the perpetrator exerts over the victim and children.
A mother, for example, who is a victim of domestic and family violence must constantly reassess the risk of harm to herself and her children and the associated need to protect from further harm. If she does not leave the abusive relationship, she may fear having her children removed from her care by the child protection agency for failing to protect them from violence. If she does leave, and endeavour to remove herself and her children from ongoing violence, she may fear being penalised by the court for not demonstrating a willingness to facilitate a relationship between the children and their abusive father. A victim in these circumstances is unlikely to resolve this tension in the best interests of her children without a high level of support that ensures the safety and wellbeing of herself and her children, her capacity to keep mothering, and the proper exercise of her legal rights. And yet research shows that victims who have experienced prolonged and severe domestic and family violence may, in seeking help, also experience stigmatising and victim-blaming social attitudes from formal and informal sources of support that convey a message that the victim is responsible for their own suffering, for example, by remaining in the abusive relationship. This experience may be aggravated by an approach taken by the child protection agency that focuses on the victim’s failure to protect rather than the perpetrator’s culpability for the violence.
Where a victim feels she has no other choice but to remove herself and her children from the abusive relationship, she may have to contend with the financial, housing, employment, social and parenting challenges already mentioned while also experiencing ongoing domestic and family violence from the perpetrator. For example, the perpetrator may engage in more insidious forms of emotional or psychological abuse using digital technologies or social media; or the perpetrator may follow, harass or monitor the victim at work or in the local community, or seek to coerce the victim into arrangements for the care and parenting of the children, or withdraw child support, or use contact handover occasions to humiliate and degrade the victim in front of the children. Prior to separation the victim may act as a buffer to prevent or deflect abuse away from the children; however, on separation, the children may spend time alone with the perpetrator placing them at greater risk of harm. Victims report that these behaviours can be as dangerous and debilitating as those experienced during the abusive relationship.
A 2015 evaluation of the 2012 Family Violence Amendments to the Commonwealth Family Law Act 1975 found that issues giving rise to safety concerns were relevant for up to one in five of the separated parents surveyed. The safety concerns associated with ongoing contact with the other parent mostly involved violent or dangerous behaviour, emotional abuse, substance misuse or mental health issues. An earlier analysis of the effect of family violence on post-separation parenting arrangements for groups of parents and children who separated after the 1995 and after the 2006 amendments to the Act recorded that nearly half of the children reported feeling "not at all safe" with one of their parents, and nearly three times more of these children reported this feeling when with their fathers than with their mothers. It also observed that women and children were far more likely than men to be victims of severe abuse, intimidation and threats, giving rise to fear and intimidation.
Where domestic and family violence occurs in families with children, the victim is most likely to be the perpetrator’s female intimate partner and the mother of the children. A perpetrator in these circumstances is also highly likely to directly abuse the children or otherwise expose them to violence. These children are also victims of domestic and family violence.
There are particular vulnerabilities a perpetrator may seek to exploit in exercising control over the victim and children. They may relate to the victim’s sense of their parenting role, their relationship with the children, and their responsibility to promote the children’s wellbeing and protect them from harm, while also trying to cope with the dangerous and debilitating effects of the violence. These factors, together with poor mental health and social conditions that may be related to the domestic and family violence, may impact on a victim’s capacity to parent effectively.
Where the victim is the mother of the child, a perpetrator’s use of the victim’s mothering role as a means of committing domestic and family violence may begin prior to pregnancy, or may continue or escalate during and after the pregnancy. A perpetrator may, for example, control or prevent contraception leading to unwanted pregnancy, or coerce the victim into pregnancy so as to prevent her from working or studying or to otherwise exercise control over her; or the perpetrator may perceive that the pregnancy occurred sooner than intended, or suspect that he is not the father.
A perpetrator may use a range of tactics to undermine or destroy the relationship between mother and child. Depending on the child’s age, the perpetrator may deliberately abuse the victim in front of the child to induce fear in the child or a sense that their mother is weak and unable to protect herself. The perpetrator may discredit the victim’s mothering skills by accusing her of being a bad mother, or he may coach and recruit the child in the perpetration of the violence, or isolate the victim and children from family, friends and other sources of support and care. Over time these corrosive and manipulative behaviours may increasingly restrict and control all aspects of the everyday lives of victims and their children, including their sense of reality and their capacity to act competently and assertively; and may ultimately impair their physical, emotional and mental health and wellbeing.
A victim responsible for the care of children may delay leaving the abusive relationship, or may leave and return on multiple occasions before finally leaving, for fear that the act of leaving may risk an escalation of the domestic and family violence. A victim’s sense of duty to protect children from further harm may directly influence these decisions.
Research demonstrates that separation coincides with an increased risk of threatened and actual violence as a perpetrator may respond to a perceived loss of control over the victim with amplified efforts to reassert control. Importantly, in the context of separating parents, there is also an increased risk of harm to children's psychological and physical wellbeing due to exposure to domestic and family violence, history of maltreatment, parental stress, social isolation, and inadequate resources and support.
Other factors that may influence a victim’s decision to remain in the abusive relationship include lack of independent financial resources; lack of child care options, other than the perpetrator; overcrowded or inadequate shelter accommodation ill equipped for the needs of her children or animals; fear that parenting orders may put the children at further risk of harm by the perpetrator; fear that the perpetrator will avoid child support obligations; or fear of isolation, poverty and homelessness. These factors may in turn serve to increase the level of control the perpetrator exerts over the victim and children.
A mother, for example, who is a victim of domestic and family violence must constantly reassess the risk of harm to herself and her children and the associated need to protect from further harm. If she does not leave the abusive relationship, she may fear having her children removed from her care by the child protection agency for failing to protect them from violence. If she does leave, and endeavour to remove herself and her children from ongoing violence, she may fear being penalised by the court for not demonstrating a willingness to facilitate a relationship between the children and their abusive father. A victim in these circumstances is unlikely to resolve this tension in the best interests of her children without a high level of support that ensures the safety and wellbeing of herself and her children, her capacity to keep mothering, and the proper exercise of her legal rights. And yet research shows that victims who have experienced prolonged and severe domestic and family violence may, in seeking help, also experience stigmatising and victim-blaming social attitudes from formal and informal sources of support that convey a message that the victim is responsible for their own suffering, for example, by remaining in the abusive relationship. This experience may be aggravated by an approach taken by the child protection agency that focuses on the victim’s failure to protect rather than the perpetrator’s culpability for the violence.
Where a victim feels she has no other choice but to remove herself and her children from the abusive relationship, she may have to contend with the financial, housing, employment, social and parenting challenges already mentioned while also experiencing ongoing domestic and family violence from the perpetrator. For example, the perpetrator may engage in more insidious forms of emotional or psychological abuse using digital technologies or social media; or the perpetrator may follow, harass or monitor the victim at work or in the local community, or seek to coerce the victim into arrangements for the care and parenting of the children, or withdraw child support, or use contact handover occasions to humiliate and degrade the victim in front of the children. Prior to separation the victim may act as a buffer to prevent or deflect abuse away from the children; however, on separation, the children may spend time alone with the perpetrator placing them at greater risk of harm. Victims report that these behaviours can be as dangerous and debilitating as those experienced during the abusive relationship.
A 2015 evaluation of the 2012 Family Violence Amendments to the Commonwealth Family Law Act 1975 found that issues giving rise to safety concerns were relevant for up to one in five of the separated parents surveyed. The safety concerns associated with ongoing contact with the other parent mostly involved violent or dangerous behaviour, emotional abuse, substance misuse or mental health issues. An earlier analysis of the effect of family violence on post-separation parenting arrangements for groups of parents and children who separated after the 1995 and after the 2006 amendments to the Act recorded that nearly half of the children reported feeling "not at all safe" with one of their parents, and nearly three times more of these children reported this feeling when with their fathers than with their mothers. It also observed that women and children were far more likely than men to be victims of severe abuse, intimidation and threats, giving rise to fear and intimidation.