When Trauma Is Labelled “Mental Health”: How Family Courts Are Failing Victims of Abuse

---

Across the UK family justice system, a troubling pattern continues to emerge.

Victims of domestic abuse enter family court already traumatised by years of coercion, financial control and psychological harm.

Instead of recognising that trauma as the result of abuse, the system too often labels it as a mental health problem and uses it to question the victim’s credibility, stability or parenting.

Meanwhile, the abuser frequently appears calm, composed and persuasive.

The result? Trauma becomes evidence against the victim, while charm becomes protection for the perpetrator.

This is not justice. It is a misunderstanding of how abuse works.

The Law Already Recognises Coercive Control

The UK has already acknowledged that abuse is not always physical.

Under the Serious Crime Act 2015, controlling or coercive behaviour in an intimate or family relationship became a criminal offence.

The law recognises that abuse can include:-

• Isolation from friends and family

• Monitoring movements and communication

• Financial control

• Threats relating to children

• Psychological manipulation and intimidation

Coercive control is about power and domination, not momentary conflict.

Yet in many family court cases, this dynamic is still misunderstood.

Family Courts Are Required to Consider Domestic Abuse

Family courts in England and Wales are required to follow Practice Direction 12J, which forms part of the Family Procedure Rules 2010.

Practice Direction 12J instructs courts to:-

• Identify patterns of coercive or controlling behaviour

• Consider the impact of abuse on the victim and the children

• Prioritise safety over parental contact

• Prevent arrangements that could expose victims or children to further harm

However, survivors frequently report that patterns of abuse are overlooked, while isolated claims about their emotional distress are given disproportionate weight.

The Domestic Abuse Act Strengthened These Protections

The Domestic Abuse Act 2021 strengthened the legal understanding of abuse.

It recognises that domestic abuse can include:-

• Psychological abuse

• Emotional abuse

• Economic abuse

• Controlling or coercive behaviour

Crucially, the Act also recognises that children who see, hear or experience the effects of domestic abuse are victims in their own right.

Despite this, many victims still find themselves defending their mental health in court rather than having the abuse itself examined.

Trauma Is the Effect of Abuse, Not Evidence Against the Victim

Guidance from the Crown Prosecution Service recognises that victims of abuse may appear:-

• Anxious

• Distressed

• Inconsistent

• Angry

• Withdrawn

These are widely recognised trauma responses.

Yet in courtrooms, these same responses are sometimes interpreted as signs of instability, while the calm and controlled presentation of an abuser is mistaken for credibility.

Trauma should never be confused with unreliability.

It is often the clearest evidence that harm has occurred.

When Abuse Is Reframed as “Parental Alienation”

Another pattern survivors often encounter in family court is the sudden claim of “parental alienation.”

Instead of examining whether a child may be frightened or distressed because they have experienced or witnessed abuse, attention shifts to the protective parent.

An abuser may say;

“I feel that the children are being alienated from me.”

This allegation can carry significant weight in court, even when there is no evidence that the other parent has manipulated the child.

But there is another possibility that must be taken seriously;

The child may be responding to harmful behaviour.

Fear, anxiety or reluctance to see a parent can be a protective response, not proof of alienation.

When children express distress, the first question should not be:

“Is the other parent influencing them?”

The first question should be:

What has the child experienced?

The Problem With “Parental Alienation” as a Pseudo-Diagnosis

A growing concern is the way parental alienation is sometimes presented as if it were a recognised mental health diagnosis.

It is not.

The term does not appear as a mental health disorder in the diagnostic manuals produced by the World Health Organization or the American Psychiatric Association.

These organisations publish the most widely used diagnostic frameworks for mental health conditions worldwide.

Despite this, the concept is sometimes treated in court as though it were a clinical condition. This can shift the focus away from investigating abuse and toward questioning the behaviour of the protective parent.

In cases involving domestic abuse, safeguarding organisations have repeatedly warned that allegations of alienation can be used to silence victims and children.

Courts must remain focused on evidence, patterns of behaviour and child safety, not labels.

Children do not develop fear in a vacuum.

Neurodivergent Victims Face Additional Barriers

Victims who are autistic or have ADHD can face additional disadvantages in court.

Direct communication styles, emotional honesty and visible distress may be misunderstood in environments that reward controlled presentation.

This means:-

• Honesty may be interpreted as hostility

• Distress may be interpreted as instability

• Trauma responses may be framed as mental illness

Meanwhile, a manipulative abuser who presents calmly may appear more credible.

The system unintentionally rewards performance over truth.

Post-Separation Abuse Through the Courts

For many survivors, abuse does not end when they leave the relationship.

It simply changes form.

Perpetrators may continue exerting control through:-

• Repeated court applications

• False allegations

• Financial pressure

• Manipulation of child arrangements

This is known as post-separation abuse, and it is increasingly recognised by domestic abuse specialists across the UK.

When patterns of abuse are not recognised, family courts risk becoming an extension of the control victims tried to escape.

Understanding Cause and Effect

The justice system must recognise a simple reality;

Abuse causes trauma

Trauma causes anxiety, depression, fear and emotional distress.

These responses are not signs of instability.

They are signs of survival.

Police, prosecutors, social workers, CAFCASS officers and family courts must understand the difference between the cause and the effect.

Recognising the Strength of Survivors

Every day, parents leave abusive relationships with little more than determination to protect their children.

Many survivors:-

• Work long hours to rebuild stability

• Go without meals so their children can eat

• Start again with nothing

• Navigate complex legal systems while carrying trauma

These parents are not unstable.

They are resilient.

They are protecting their children the only way they can.

The Justice System Must Stop Punishing Survivors

The UK already has laws recognising coercive control, psychological abuse and economic abuse.

But laws alone are not enough if the systems responsible for applying them fail to recognise the reality of abuse.

Family courts must:-

• Recognise patterns of coercive control

• Understand trauma-informed practice

• Identify post-separation abuse

• Prevent the weaponisation of mental health narratives

• Ensure the voices of children are heard

Because when the system mistakes trauma for instability, and manipulation for credibility, the consequences can be devastating.

Survivors who escape abuse should not be retraumatised by the very institutions meant to protect them.

Children should not be forced into contact that ignores their lived experience.

And abuse should never be hidden behind the language of mental health or alienation.

Trauma is not the problem.

The abuse that caused it is.

---

Deanna Newell Family Law

Advocacy for truth-tellers, survivors, and the children who deserve better