The Family Court Scandal and Abuse

[SpringMum30]

Wasn't sure what to post this under:

Women who are victims of domestic abuse are made by authorities to leave their abusers or risk losing their children.

Women who are victims of domestic abuse are made by the family courts to coparent with their abusers or risk losing their children.

The family court system is not fit for purpose. Women are re traumatised during proceedings whereby they are forced to face their abuser, are further gaslit by Cafcass and magistrates and forced to push their children into unsafe contact arrangements.

The court want to handle cases as quickly as possible and women are criticised for raising allegations of abuse as this prolongs the court process.

The abuser uses the court to further their abuse through the children and is not held accountable for their harmful and abusive behaviour.

If you can relate to this then I am sorry. The trauma experienced can trigger ptsd, anxiety and depression to name a few. I don’t know how to change the system but in raising awareness and talking about it I hope it’s a move in the right direction for real change.

I would bloody love for this to start happening. A bit of accountability for the do-gooders that get to walk away once they've made their 'expert' decision.

Yes, I have a very low opinion of family courts.

We have almost no contact with our DGC due to the claims made by our ex DiL.
Believing malicious adults, who are unwilling to share their children with the other parent, brings about so much damage, including attachment disorders. Children are not the priority.

Unfortunately some of us have no choice over whether we go to court or not. If your ex starts court proceedings, you don’t have much choice. If your ex takes your children and won’t give them back, and won’t let you see or contact them, you don’t have much choice. If your ex is abusive towards the children, you don’t have much choice (and if you withhold contact, ex will often then start proceedings, and again you have no choice - but are often even worse off).

I agree. It's mired in misogyny from the bottom up.

One CAFCASS worker on a home visit sat on my bed and he told me my ex still loved me, so I could make 'all of this go away' if I stopped being silly and took him back and the judge ignored the next one who utterly believed me to declare that I'd 'very sadly but understandably, been tempted to gild the lily' despite said gilding being DD making a statement that she had been assaulted.

Another a few years later informed me quite seriously that the reason we didn't get on was because the ex was a Pisces whilst I was a Capricorn. And then when this was brought up in Court, said it was just jokey banter and I was making it out to be more than it was. I mean, I could have sworn that we didn't get on because he was an alcoholic rapist and abuser who pinned me to the wall by my throat until I nearly passed out (or died), but no, it's because my mother had an induction rather than waiting for me to die in utero, apparently.

From my experience, I feel the system is mired in misandry. Men can do no right and they have to jump through hoops to see their child every other weekend. Whereas the mum is automatically granted residence.

An example - DH and his ex were said to both be manipulating their son and not able to put his needs first. They concluded that DSS was a victim of emotional harm and abuse from both parents (which I don't agree with).

The result of that was DH fighting to not have his contact supervised yet mum (who had done the same) would have been awarded more time unsupervised with their son.

Makes no sense. I feel the system is sexist but that's just based on my own experience. I have experienced the system as a mother and I was treated hugely differently to my DH.

@Iwasafool

I think the system is breaking parents, children and good social workers alike.

I definitely think there are 'professionals' with bias and the system is pro 'keeping the family together' (hence why kids who are being abused are left with a caregiver who ends up killing them rather than being taken into care and possibly surviving) which in cases as shown here, is dangerous and will inevitably cause more concerns down the line. I think there are professionals who think they know better and there are professionals who base new cases on old case evidence and push an agenda they've assumed rightly or wrongly.

I personally feel contact centres are not used correctly enough and from my own experience of working in one, I saw too many cases where the parent was using as a control tactic towards the other parent.

The social care system needs a complete overhaul and restart to do any good. As it stands, they are training social workers who have good intentions but then overwork them with rigorous and almost impossible duty schedules and uncapped case loads.

The whole thing is fucked basically and I think a lot of it is down to luck. My local authority for example is in special measures and I would genuinely fear for my family if I had to use the court system or social care system right now.

I think it will, but it will take time. Like with the CSA scandals of the 70s and 80s it wil be when the children hit adulthood and get therapy and the enormity of the harm done hits them that some may start to (quite rightly) seek recompense.

Bias works both ways. It is interesting on here that posts about mothers ‘playing the system’ to keep their children to themselves are just about ignored. My stepson has had his life near ruined by his ExW. Our family have lost a family member and more importantly a LO has lost his grandparents, aunts, uncles and cousins.
This is a female with many issues, is charming and giving but very controlling. Watching from a more objective stance as a step parent, I could have predicted this is what she would do. I didn't forsee that she would get away with it though.

A fair system would produce the right outcome for the child not for whichever is the most manipulative parent.

Some I know has been told by police to report her ex, asked her to detail the abuse, which was traumatic. SS then blamed her for not leaving earlier.
She's afraid to say what went on and afraid not to say.

Next step is court, ex still manipulating the DC against her whenever there is contact. If you ask the DC, they love their daddy and want to see him. Meanwhile the police are investigating his behaviour to their mum.

I agree. My kids will be those kids.

I hope the children affected Will speak out when they are adults. I hope they recover from their trauma.

This is a valid point but I think the overall argument is that mothers are presumed to be lying about allegations of abuse in the first instance. Likely because of previous cases in the past. So when there are real accusations it's very difficult to prove and even with evidence often the abuser, Cafcass and the magistrates will justify the behaviour. This is I have now learned is referred to as a different 'parenting style'. They are desperate to close the case and focus on the damage to the children by being 'within the court system' whilst ignoring the abuse from the abuser themselves. This was my experience and I left utterly traumatised. I sat in a court room for two full days where my ex lied, the Cafcass officer supported him and the magistrates increased contact as a result. Now I have to hand over the children to an abusive person or risk being in breach of a court order.

I think the issue of money isn’t talked about enough.

Child maintenance reductions for contact, or nil child maintenance for 50/50 care, mean it’s often in people’s best financial interests to have shared care, even if they don’t actually want to/can’t parent.
Legal aid is only available in cases of domestic abuse.
With divorce, the primary concern is housing the children, therefore whoever has primary residency of the children usually ends up with more than 50% of assets/a house (I know that’s a simplification, but it’s generally true).
The benefits system favours the resident parent - child benefit, UC, housing etc

None of this can be brought up in contact/residency disputes, but it’s naive to think finances don’t come into this for a good chunk of people.

I wrote my dissertation on this 😔

My experience is that the mum is not automatically granted anything - the presumption is continuation of the status quo. I think it can look like the mum is often favoured, simply because in the majority of cases the dad moves out, so the mum is automatically the resident parent (especially if she already works part-time/has done the majority of care until that point).
In cases I know where the opposite has happened (usually women fleeing abuse or separating whilst under medical care), it seems like the dad is favoured and the woman often struggles to get contact, nevermind primary residency.
The courts just want to keep things as they are, unless there are incredibly compelling reasons not to.

Also child maintenance is used as a tool to maintain post separation abuse. My ex is self employed apparently owns his own company and yet 'pays a low salary and takes dividends' this means he pays zero child maintenance whilst living a lavish lifestyle, trips abroad, fancy meals etc. I actually raised it in court as I was confused about his employment status since he didn't have to pay maintenance at all. The courts do not care

Oh absolutely! We could have a whole other thread about child maintenance issues 😅

A lot of this is a symptom of the wider cost of living problem though. A single person on say £28k will be calculated to pay around £300/month for 2 children if they see them EOW. They likely won’t be entitled to any benefits, but will be expected to provide somewhere for their children to stay over (I.e. bedsit/house share not acceptable), and with the cost of living that’s all going to be a huge struggle.
Note, I’m not saying the resident parent doesn’t need the £300, I’m sure they do (& more!). But it’s a huge motivation to get more contact in order to drop that £300, and if they become resident parent, suddenly other benefits open up for them too.

A lot of this could be stopped if the cost of living was addressed and people weren’t left scraping by.

These are all valid points but the resident parent (normally the mother) needs more financial support especially with young children as they are likely juggling work and childcare. They are likely to have been off work the most for maternity and may not even be working full time. The non resident parent who has less time with the kids has more capacity to work because they don't have to sort childcare, do the school runs etc.

This has been my experience I work part time and have to work out the school/preschool drop offs, take time off work when the kids are sick etc. My ex can work whenever he likes and so doesn't have to worry about these things

I think rather than misandry, it's based on numbers and circumstances. There are more mothers that are the primary carer, more mothers that are forced to run for their safety, more mothers that are left with the children etc. In the vast majority of cases the children already are with the mother for whatever reason, and she is their primary carer so it's a maintaining the status quo situation.

If a mother left her kids behind with their father, especially for a long period in time, no court would say "oh, you're the mother ,here have the kids back immediately ".

@SpringMum30
I completely agree with you! And it doesn’t help that child maintenance is not a guaranteed payment and could just not be paid.
I just think that money is a motivating factor for some people to fight for more contact or equal residency, and that’s not recognised enough. And I think that ultimately this could be lessened significantly if everyone wasn’t so skint all the time - it would allow some parents to think what’s actually best for the children, as opposed to what’s best for them. It’s just another consequence of such high cost of living.
It wouldn’t stop everyone, you’d still get some parents not wanting to give their ex a penny, but they are also more likely to be abusive in other ways too.

I am so sorry. I'm in a similar situation. It is heartbreaking.

The money is a big thing. When the courts put a PSO to stay in SW London, ExH took a demotion to pay less but had loads of money in bonds, high interest rates in off shore accounts etc. He was paying 400 per month, but our childcare bill alone was 1800 and my rent for the shelter was 800. I couldn't afford to move out of my shelter because of the PSO and the cost of rent. I was on 2200 per month and exH refused to pay towards transport costs, uniform, clothes, childcare etc. I even tried to get the PSO lifter citing I couldn't afford to pay my rent and afford food and heating and I had defaulted so many times they were in the process of evicting me. The judge actually told me if I quit my job and went on benefits I would be better off. I had colleagues noticing I was losing a lot of weight and were bringing me in ready meals because I literally couldn't afford to eat as I was saving any food I could afford for DD. ExH just kept claiming I could move back in with him and it would no longer be a problem.

How would the adult child in this situation prove the abuse and trauma?

@coodawoodashooda I'm sorry you can relate too x

It's soul destroying. Why are the courts not worried about the repercussions of their decisions?