Family Court: Stop Blaming the System and Start Demanding Accountability
- Deanna Newell
- Jul 5
- 4 min read
Everyone is blaming the family courts.
The courts are accused of getting it wrong, failing children, ignoring abuse, and allowing injustice to continue.
While there are certainly areas that need reform, there is a difficult truth that many people do not want to hear:
The courts can only make decisions based on the evidence placed before them.
Family courts are designed to assess facts, truth, and evidence. And yet all too often they are presented with competing narratives instead.
A narrative is not evidence.
A feeling is not evidence.
An allegation is not evidence.
Evidence is evidence.
This distinction matters because every day professionals, judges, Cafcass officers, and support services are faced with two completely different versions of the same relationship. One person may claim there was a “joint account” and therefore no financial abuse. And yet bank statements, emails, correspondence, and financial records may tell a very different story.
The reality of many abusive relationships is that a so-called joint account was never truly joint at all. One person’s income remained under their control while the other person’s access to money, employment, or financial independence was restricted.
That is financial and economic abuse.
For years, survivors have struggled to have these experiences recognised. Many lost trust in the system because coercive control, financial abuse, and post-separation abuse were poorly understood.
Thankfully, this is beginning to change.
Judges, family court professionals, Independent Domestic Violence Advisors (IDVAs), and domestic abuse pathways are increasingly recognising patterns of coercive control and economic abuse.
The law is slowly catching up with the reality many survivors have lived through for years however progress remains slow.
The Problem with Narratives
Family court is not social media.
It is not a place where the loudest voice should win.
It is not a place where whoever tells the most convincing story should be believed.
The process requires witness statements, disclosure, evidence, and signed statements of truth.
Imagine attending a job interview without a CV. You could tell the employer anything you like about your experience, but eventually they will want proof.
The same principle applies in court.
If parties were required to provide clear evidence alongside their allegations from the outset, many cases could be resolved more quickly.
This would save court time, reduce costs, and prevent taxpayers from funding lengthy disputes built on unsupported claims.
The Misuse of “Parental Alienation”
Few phrases generate more controversy than parental alienation.
Today, the term is used so loosely that it risks losing all meaning. There is a significant difference between:-
Being alienated from your child.
Alleging parental alienation as a pattern of behaviour.
These are not the same thing. The careless use of the term can distract from genuine safeguarding concerns and minimise domestic abuse.
Too often, coercive control, emotional abuse, and post-separation abuse are relabelled as “parental alienation” without proper examination of the evidence.
Again, facts matter.
Evidence matters.
Narratives should never replace investigation.
Follow the Money
One of the most uncomfortable truths in family law is that post-separation abuse often follows financial incentives. Not in every case, but in enough to raise serious concerns.
Some parents restrict contact, refuse flexibility, cancel arrangements at the last minute, obstruct holidays, create conflict around birthdays and at Christmas, and maintain a constant battle for control.
The issue is not always about the children.
Sometimes it is about anger.
Sometimes it is about revenge.
Sometimes it is about entitlement.
Sometimes it is about refusing to accept that the other parent has moved on, remarried, rebuilt their life, or formed a successful blended family.
Control does not always end when a relationship ends.
It simply changes form.
The consequences are often devastating for children caught in the middle.
The Questions Courts Should Be Asking
When professionals assess domestic abuse, they should look beyond the allegations and ask practical questions:-
How long was the relationship?
Were children involved?
Did both parties work?
If one parent did not work, why not?
Was their ability to work restricted?
Who retained the family home?
Who retained pensions and savings?
What financial settlement was reached?
What do the bank statements show?
What does the communication history show?
These questions often reveal patterns that narratives alone cannot.
Domestic abuse has no gender.
Control is control.
Whether it involves restricting access to money or restricting access to children, both are forms of coercion when used to dominate, punish, or manipulate another person.
The Charming Parent and the Distressed Parent
One of the greatest challenges for professionals is understanding trauma.
The calm, charming individual is often perceived as credible.
The distressed, emotional individual is often perceived as unstable.
And yet trauma does not present neatly.
Imagine sitting through hearing after hearing listening to false allegations, distortions, and denials while being expected to remain calm.
Many survivors cannot.
That does not make them dishonest.
It makes them human.
Professionals must continue improving their understanding of trauma responses, coercive control, and post-separation abuse.
Children Are Paying the Price
Contact arrangements should always be about children.
Not power.
Not money.
Not revenge.
Children need emotional security, financial stability, and meaningful relationships with safe parents and yet financial abuse and economic abuse continue to push many families into poverty.
Some parents pay the minimum possible.
Some avoid responsibility altogether.
Others use financial support as a bargaining tool.
Children cannot live on promises.
They cannot live on principles.
Children need food, clothing, housing, heating, education, and opportunities.
When adults refuse to take responsibility, children bear the consequences.
Reform Must Focus on Reality
Family court reform is needed.
But reform should not begin with assumptions.
It should begin with evidence.
We need better joined-up working between family courts, child maintenance services, domestic abuse specialists, and safeguarding professionals.
We need earlier identification of coercive control and economic abuse.
We need accountability when false allegations are deliberately made.
We need systems that focus less on competing narratives and more on objective facts.
Most importantly, we need to remember why these systems exist in the first place.
Not for parents.
Not for professionals.
Not for politics.
For children.
Because every decision made today shapes the next generation’s understanding of relationships, responsibility, and respect.
If we continue to ignore coercive control, financial abuse, and post-separation abuse, we risk normalising them for our children.
And that is a price society cannot afford to pay.
Deanna Newell Family Law
Advocacy for truth-tellers, survivors, and the children who deserve better
