When “High Conflict” Isn’t Conflict: Why Family Justice Must Recognise Post-Separation Coercive Control
By Deanna Newell,
Founder of DN Family Law
Every week at DN Family Law, we hear from parents who tell remarkably similar stories.
Their relationship has ended, but the conflict has not.
One parent is trying to rebuild life after separation. The other continues to use the children as a means of power, control, intimidation or punishment.
Too often, these cases are dismissed as simply being “high conflict.” however conflict and coercive control are not the same thing.
Conflict usually involves two people who disagree.
Coercive control is a pattern of behaviour. It is about domination, manipulation and maintaining power over another person.
Separation does not always end that behaviour. In many families, it simply changes form. The greatest tragedy is that children often become the vehicle through which that control continues.
Children Should Never Become Weapons
Children should never be expected to choose between parents.
They should never be asked to carry messages.
They should never be encouraged to reject a safe parent.
They should never be burdened with adult problems or made to feel responsible for decisions they are too young to carry.
And yet this continues to happen across the family justice system every day.
At DN Family Law, we believe that every professional involved in family proceedings should begin with one simple question: “What is in this child’s best interests?”
Too often, that question becomes overshadowed by allegations, litigation, financial disputes and parental conflict.
Children deserve better.
The Law Already Recognises the Importance of Protecting Children
The welfare of the child is, and must remain, the court’s paramount consideration.
The Childrens Act 1989
Under Section 1 of The Children Act 1989, when a court determines any question relating to the upbringing of a child, the child’s welfare is the court’s paramount consideration. This is commonly known as the welfare principle.
The court must also consider the welfare checklist, including:-
The child’s wishes and feelings (considered in light of their age and understanding)
Their physical, emotional and educational needs
The likely effect of any change in circumstances
Their age, sex, background and any characteristics the court considers relevant
Any harm the child has suffered or is at risk of suffering
How capable each parent is of meeting the child’s needs
These principles reinforce that decisions should never be based on parental conflict alone, but on careful assessment of what is genuinely in the child’s best interests.
The Domestic Abuse Act 2021
The Domestic Abuse Act 2021 recognises that abuse extends far beyond physical violence. The Act defines domestic abuse to include:-
Controlling or coercive behaviour
Emotional or psychological abuse
Economic abuse
Threatening or intimidating behaviour
Abuse can continue after separation, and professionals are increasingly recognising that coercive and controlling behaviour may continue through disputes concerning children, finances or court proceedings.
Serious Crime Act 2015
Section 76 of the Serious Crime Act 2015 created the offence of controlling or coercive behaviour in an intimate or family relationship.
Although the law has evolved over time, it reflects Parliament’s recognition that abuse is often a pattern of behaviour rather than isolated incidents.
Family Procedure Rules 2010 – Practice Direction 12J
Practice Direction 12J requires family courts to consider allegations of domestic abuse when determining child arrangements. The court must carefully assess:-
Whether domestic abuse has occurred
The impact on both the child and the other parent
Whether any child arrangements order would expose either to an unacceptable risk of harm
This guidance makes clear that the safety and welfare of children and parents should always come before the promotion of contact.
The Need for Further Reform
While the legal framework provides important protections, many families continue to experience lengthy proceedings, inconsistent assessments and decisions that can fail to identify patterns of post-separation coercive control.
At DN Family Law, we believe the law should be strengthened through a Mandatory Three-Tier Family Assessment Framework, ensuring that every family receives an early, evidence-based assessment of:-
Safeguarding concerns
Domestic abuse and coercive control
Post-separation abuse
Financial abuse and hidden income
Child maintenance disputes linked to parenting arrangements
The child’s emotional, developmental and educational needs
Early identification would improve consistency, reduce unnecessary litigation, support professionals in making informed decisions and, most importantly, ensure that children remain at the centre of family justice.
The law already tells us that the child’s welfare must come first.
The challenge is ensuring that the system consistently delivers on that principle.
Recognising Post - Separation Coercive Control
Post-separation coercive control is rarely one isolated incident. It is usually a sustained pattern of behaviours intended to maintain influence or control over a former partner by using the children, family justice processes or financial arrangements.
It may include:-
Undermining the other parent in front of the children
Manipulating, pressuring or coaching children into rejecting or fearing a safe and loving parent without evidence-based safeguarding concerns
Using children to pass messages, gather information, monitor the other parent’s life
Making children feel responsible for decisions about contact by asking them whether they “want” to see a parent, instead of adults making appropriate decisions in the child’s best interests
Frequently cancelling, frustrating or disrupting agreed contact arrangements to create uncertainty and emotional distress
Deliberately restricting overnight contact or meaningful parenting time without a legitimate safeguarding reason. In some cases, this may also have financial consequences by increasing or maintaining child maintenance liability
Refusing reasonable flexibility over parenting arrangements while expecting the other parent to accommodate every request
Withholding information about education, healthcare, school reports, parents’ evenings, extracurricular activities or significant life events
Excluding the other parent from major decisions despite shared parental responsibility
Using repeated court applications or complaints primarily to continue control or prolong conflict rather than resolve genuine welfare concerns
Making parenting decisions that prioritise power or punishment instead of the child’s emotional, educational and developmental needs
Encouraging children to reject, resent or distrust a parent’s new partner, step-parent, half-siblings or step-siblings
Telling children they have been “replaced” by a parent’s new family or that the other parent no longer loves them
Encouraging children to believe healthy relationships cannot exist by telling them never to marry or trust future partners
Rewarding children for refusing contact with a safe parent or making them feel guilty for enjoying time with that parent
Alienating children from grandparents, aunts, uncles, cousins and the wider family without a genuine safeguarding reason
Repeatedly exposing children to adult disputes about finances, court proceedings or child maintenance that they should never be expected to carry
Not every separated family experiencing disagreement is affected by coercive control.
Equally, genuine concerns about domestic abuse, coercive control or safeguarding must always be investigated thoroughly and acted upon without delay.
The challenge is ensuring professionals can distinguish between the two through robust, evidence-based assessment.
Children Should Never Carry Adult Responsibilities
Perhaps one of the most damaging phrases a child can hear is:-
“Do you want to see Mum?”
“Do you want to see Dad?”
“It’s your choice”
While these questions may appear child-focused, they often place an overwhelming emotional burden on children.
Children naturally want to love both parents.
They worry about hurting someone’s feelings.
They fear disappointing one parent by wanting to spend time with the other.
That is not a decision children should be expected to make.
Adults — not children — must take responsibility for making safe and appropriate arrangements.
Children’s voices matter, particularly as they grow older. However, their wishes should always be considered alongside their welfare, emotional wellbeing, maturity and any evidence that they may have been influenced, pressured or manipulated.
The Impact on Children
When children become caught in post-separation coercive control, they often experience:-
Anxiety and emotional distress
Divided loyalties
Feelings of guilt and responsibility
Loss of confidence and self-esteem
Depression
Emotional insecurity
Difficulties trusting others
Problems forming healthy adult relationships
Long-term psychological trauma
The emotional impact may not always be visible during childhood, but its effects can last a lifetime.
Despite the legal protections that already exist, many families continue to experience inconsistent assessments, lengthy proceedings and decisions that fail to identify patterns of post-separation coercive control. Too often, cases are labelled as “high conflict” without a structured assessment of the evidence.
Why DN Family Law Is Calling for Reform
For more than a year, DN Family Law has been campaigning for meaningful reform of the family justice and child maintenance systems.
Our experience has shown that too many cases are labelled as “high conflict” without professionals being given the time, tools or framework to identify whether coercive control, financial abuse, safeguarding concerns or manipulation are actually driving the dispute.
This is why we are calling for the introduction of a Mandatory Three-Tier Family Assessment Framework.
This framework would support earlier, evidence-based identification of:-
Genuine safeguarding concerns
Domestic abuse and coercive control
Post-separation abuse
Financial abuse
Hidden income affecting child maintenance
Parenting arrangements influenced by financial incentives rather than a child’s welfare
Families requiring specialist intervention before conflict escalates into long-term harm
Earlier assessment would reduce unnecessary litigation, improve consistency in decision-making and place children’s welfare back at the centre of family justice.
A System That Puts Children First
Children deserve better than becoming casualties of adult conflict.
They deserve a family justice system that recognises the difference between disagreement and abuse, investigates concerns fairly, follows the evidence wherever it leads and places their welfare above litigation, assumptions and financial incentives.
Children are not weapons.
They are not messengers.
They are not bargaining chips.
Children deserve the love, stability and security of meaningful relationships with both parents whenever it is safe and in their best interests.
Family justice should never be about which parent wins.
It should always be about ensuring that every child has the opportunity to grow up safe, supported and free from adult conflict.
That is the future DN Family Law is campaigning to achieve
Conclusion
Parliament has already made clear that a child’s welfare is paramount.
The challenge is ensuring the family justice system consistently identifies coercive control, distinguishes it from genuine safeguarding concerns, and makes decisions based on evidence rather than assumptions.
Children are not weapons. They are not messengers. They are not bargaining chips.
CHildren deserve a family justice system that protects them, supports healthy relationships where safe, and puts their welfare before parental conflict.
That is why DN Family Law is campaigning for meaningful reform through a Mandatory Three-Tier Family Assessment Framework.
Deanna Newell | Founder | DN Family Law
Advocacy for truth-tellers, survivors, and the children who deserve better
