Lawyers in Australia are telling mothers not to disclose domestic violence incidents in Family Court over fears that their clients will be accused of trying to alienate the other parent from the children involved.
This problem is not specific to Australia, as it is something UK lawyers also tell mothers, so this piece is an exceptionally important read, not just for the general areas of concern it highlights, but for understanding Court culture in England and Wales, as well.
Needless to say, judges and other interested parties in Australia are denying the allegations, which have been made not just by parents who have experienced the system, but by experts working in the field.
We are adding an extract from the piece below:
LAWYERS are telling mums “to lie to the Family Court” about domestic violence and child abuse because they fear their clients will be seen as trying to alienate the other parent from the kids’ lives.
The Family Court’s chief justice rejected the allegation, saying there were measures in place to ensure children were safe.
However, a number of experts told ARM Newsdesk they believed if judges suspected “alienation” – which is viewed as emotional abuse of the child – they would award custody to the dangerous parent.
Child sexual assault prevention agency Bravehearts, the National Child Protection Alliance and Dr Deborah Walsh, a domestic violence expert with 20 years experience of the Family Court, confirmed it is common practice for solicitors to warn mothers to keep abuse allegations out of custody proceedings.
Bravehearts founder Hetty Johnston said she would be raising her concerns about this and other Family Court issues at a meeting with Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull next week.
Bravehearts is backing a petition for the Federal Government to roll out a royal commission into Australia’s family law system or to expand the terms of reference of the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse so it can examine how the Family Court is “failing” children.
Ms Johnstone said she recently spoke to a mum who was told by two legal experts not to bother telling the court about concerns her daughter was being abused.
The woman reported the abuse to police but there was not enough evidence for an arrest, Ms Johnstone said.
“She was told that if she was to do that (lodge the paperwork alleging abuse) the court would frown upon it,” Ms Johnstone said.
“She would be viewed by the court as a vexatious mother, bringing about these allegations and coaching her daughter in these allegations – all of the things we’ve been hearing for 20 years.”
National Child Protection Alliance president Maurice Kriss said lawyers were so concerned about putting abuse reports before the court that some refused to represent the non-abusive clients who wanted to tell the truth.
“The solicitor in some cases will refuse to take on the case because he knows in advance the outcome and he doesn’t want the stress of fighting a losing battle or, losing a case that will damage his reputation,” Mr Kriss said.
“Because of equal parenting laws and attitude of judges towards equal parenting, this is something few solicitors wish to challenge.”
Dr Walsh said re-adjusting the royal commission’s investigation framework would ensure any Family Court failings could be investigated in front of the Australian community.
“Yes, I have heard of it happening on a number of occasions,” the University of Queensland family violence researcher and lecturer said of the unorthodox legal advice.
“It’s very common in domestic violence services for us to hear women be given that sort of advice.
“The commission of inquiry at the moment has uncovered a whole range of institutional abuse of children in care and so their frame of reference could be used to investigate on behalf of the children.
“People come into the family court thinking about justice and ultimately lose their children.”
Family Court of Australia chief justice Diana Bryant said she doubted the legal profession was advising people to mislead judges about abuse and that there was legislation in place to protect children.
“I doubt that it is true. I hope it’s not true,” Chief Justice Bryant said.
“I do understand that these are people’s perceptions and they arise from very complex situations.
“The act provides for matters to be raised with the court and they should be.
“No one should ever suggest it’s not appropriate in any way (to raise allegations).”
Law Council of Australia Family Law Section chairwoman Wendy Kayler-Thomson said experienced lawyers would not advise their clients to lie to the Family Court.
“The Family Law Section rejects … allegations about the way that allegations of child sexual abuse are dealt with by the Family Court of Australia,” she said.
For people in Australia >> If you are at risk of sexual assault or require support please phone Bravehearts on 1800 272 831; If you are at risk of domestic violence please phone the national hotline 1800RESPECT on 1800 737 732.
Can Abbey’s heartbreaking story spark family law reform?
`Abbey’s father was convicted of sexually assaulting the child’s best friend in 2002 and jailed for two years.
The abuse happened while the little female victim was sleeping over at Abbey’s house.
Gill wanted Abbey’s father to have minimal contact with her daughter for fear he would abuse her as well.
However, the Family Court ruled the distressed mum was simply being a ‘hysterical woman’ and a ‘vindictive wife’ before allowing Abbey’s father to see the girl so she could have a “meaningful relationship with both parents”.
Just two months before she died, Abbey wrote a poem to her father, expressing the pain and anguish he forced upon her when he decided to abuse her.
“You took away all my innocence, left me dead inside,” the poem reads.
“I’m broken now, torn and ripped in pieces.
Sadly, Abbey’s story is far from unusual.
There is a history of Family Court judges appearing to disregard the behaviour of domestic violence and child abuse perpetrators when issuing orders for children.
http://www.qt.com.au/news/how-abbeys-heartbreaking-story-can-spark-family-la/3100511/
LikeLiked by 2 people
Reblogged this on Musings of a Penpusher and commented:
There are lies; damned lies, and now there’s official advice. What next?
LikeLiked by 2 people
We’ve heard of lies; damned lies, and now it seems there’s legal advice, and still the victims suffer.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I have had personal experience of this over 20 years ago in Ireland.
Working as an advocate in both UK and Ireland I came across this legal advice from solicitors, barristers etc re not disclosing DV and or child sexual abuse – and be punished by loosing custody for doing the right thing .
Crimes are meant to be reported ……so why do soliciotrs etc advise clients not to report DV and or child abuse……thus aiding and abetting abusers and rapists?
Then I learned that this pattern exists in UK, Ireland, USA, Australia, Canada etc
Even children are punished by social workers, GALS etc for disclosing domestic violence…like in our case in Ireland – when Electric Shock Therapy was ordered by a social worker to burn out all memories of DV – which they claimed never happened-??and then the children were ordered to live with their physical and sexual abuser.
The judge apologised and said he had to OBEY SOCIAL WORKERS.??
I have met mothers who went back to their abusers in order to protect the children from violence and sexual abuse.
It is a world wide issue Natasha and the pattern is always the same.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Nothing you said in your post is true.
LikeLike
I knew the Family Courts in this country believe they cannot ever be wrong, but didn’t realise this happened in Oz too, thinking it had a more enlightened approach to these matters. Everyone who comes to me for advice on family disputes I advise to try and avoid the Family Court at almost any cost. The problem is that people still have faith in these institutions and cannot believe they are so corrupt and incompetent.
I have also advised a mother not to mention abuse in Court as she would risk being accused of ‘hysteria’ and of coaching the child. It seems that the Court needs a warning or prosecution from the police to believe a mother in these circumstances, and heaven help a father if he claims he is being abused, or his child, by the mother – and it does happen too.
I appreciate that the Courts have very difficult and emotive decisions to make and in the past have been accused of always believing the parent claiming abuse and preventing the child or children from having contact with the other parent until he (or she) is proved innocent. Now the pendulum has swung completely the other way, but two wrongs do not make a right! There has to be a better way than this.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Reblogged this on World4Justice : NOW! Lobby Forum..
LikeLike
Reblogged this on Child Care Proceedings Exposed.
LikeLike
Well this sort of thing doesnt surprise me in the slightest. An as exposed by Justice Pauffley, UK family court judges are conspiring to remove children from their parents unjustly. secret deals are taking place between judges and Social worker via emails etc and parents are not given a fare trial.
“Rulings by family judges were ‘cut and pasted’ from recommendations emailed to the court by social workers, the High Court found”.
why this has not hit the BBC news and why prosecutions havnt followed i just dont know.
Read the story here,
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2562249/It-never-happen-Appeal-judge-slams-cut-paste-decision-family-court-led-social-workers-taking-baby-parents-unjustly.html
LikeLiked by 1 person
Oh yesssssssssssssssss. and also we found social workers removed court orders from the files refusing social workers an ICO
The Gal was also involved.
Justice judge sent mother a copy of the refusal order – now why did he do that……unless he knew.
LikeLike
Reblogged this on L8in.
LikeLike
So mums are worried about reporting domestic violence.
Here’s what happens to a dad who has reported domestic violence with hard evidence including police reports of his daughter being raped –
and the mum still got the children strongly against the children’s wishes.
ALL FACT,, ALL EVIDENCED.
……………..
Dear Clerk to the court,
Please also pass this to judge [edited].
I informed judge [edited] in the last trial, that there was no equality of arms. In fact, it was not just unequal, but total abuse.
On the court tape, you will hear me describe the reality of this torture and abuse by government employees.
1. They have caused gross mental distress for years.
2. They keep the distress ongoing by ongoing covering up the abuses of my children. Courts, police, CWaC are acting as a joint enterprise to cover up negligence and crimes that spiralled into more and more criminality.
3. They arrested me and forced the non protection of my children when a violent abusive woman repeatedly assaulted and abused our children and me. They forced that she had full coercive and manipulative control of our house, our company, our finances. The police never followed their own procedures and simply arrested and charged another man in their stupidity to tick boxes and pretend they were reducing domestic violence – when in fact, they were acting as a resource to carry out domestic violence. In two different Crown Court appearances, it was heavily evidenced that these child abuses by this criminal woman had taken place.
4. They destroyed my business,
5. They destroyed my personal finances.
6. They stole my car and disposed of it.
7. They made me homeless.
8. They imprisoned me for reporting crimes.
9. They stole all of my computers and by imprisoning me destroyed my cloud backups of all of my data.
10. They forced me to live in distress, isolation, poverty, fretting over my children….all to gag me and cover up their crimes.
11. They currently have stolen all my computers , phones, tablets, hard drives, memory chips, walkman, kindle, sketch books yet again ….leaving me with having to live off scraps, cold, lack of washing facilities, …in order to scrimp enough to get another working computer.
12. Having stolen and destroyed so many resources, it has been a nightmare to reassemble the data ….terabytes of data, millions of files.
13. They stole the laptop that has over £20,000 of software on it that was used mostly in CAD , mathematical modelling and writing papers. Also, detailed access to the website resources.
14. They covered up the abuses of a vile paedophile who moved into the house with my ex and my children.
15. The house I solely paid the mortgage on for almost 20 years while my ex wife gaily squandered her money and my money on entertaining herself. Chester family court acted criminally to make an order from an ex parte heariing to get the equity on the house transferred to her.
.
In a nutshell, you put me in Auschwitz and then offered me what you call a fair trial. The scale of the abuses is mind breaking.
.
Where is this equality of arms that the courts promise ?
.
I have abusers and liars and court tapes and evidence that shows it all. It is hardly surprising that these criminals in [edited] authorities are so desperate to finish me off and get me into the gas chamber.
.
So, where is the equality of arms ?
Even, where is my laptop that is needed to edit the website to even remove the reporting of your crimes ?
.
This is all EVIDENCED.
Public redacted evidence on [edited]
[edited]
LikeLike
Thank you for your comment, and I’m so sorry to hear about this. Apologies also for editing your comment, this is due to reporting restrictions.
LikeLike
“National Child Protection Alliance president Maurice Kriss said lawyers were so concerned about putting abuse reports before the court that some refused to represent the non-abusive clients who wanted to tell the truth”
That’s one way of looking at it, of course. The alternative interpretation is that the lawyers are well-aware of the wide-spread issue of strategic false allegations of physical and sexual abuse in the Family Courts, correctly assessed their client’s veracity and didn’t wish to be involved perverting the course of justice!
LikeLike
This is just the pendulum swinging the other way.
For years social workers, CAFCASS and Women’s Aid, have encouraged mothers to make false allegations of domestic violence to exclude fathers and as a result alienate the child.
The judiciary were well aware of this and in 2010, led by Sir Nicholas Wall, took action.
Now, the harm suffered by a child through domestic abuse of a parent (invariably the mother) must be determined by a criminal prosecution at the standard of “significant harm” of the public law thresholds for taking children into care (s.76(4)(b) Serious Crimes Act 2015/s.32(1)(b) Children Act 1989).
If allegations are made without this conviction then the courts will assume that the mother is attempting to alienate the child.
LikeLike