Plea for changes to family law system to help victims of domestic violence

The Irish legal system can be retraumatising for victims of domestic violence and does not always give the best outcomes for children, a Cork researcher has said.

UCC researcher Aisling Parkes, who has worked on two landmark reports on how Ireland’s family law system works for the people it is designed to protect, told The Echo that changes were needed.

'The Operation of the In Camera Rule in Family Law Proceedings' was commissioned by the Department of Justice, while 'Exploring how Victim-Survivors of Domestic Violence and Abuse Experience Navigating the Irish Family Law System in Guardianship, Custody and Access Cases' was commissioned by Women’s Aid.

The in camera rule means that certain family law proceedings are heard in private, with no public access to the courtroom, to protect the privacy of people involved, but Ms Parkes told The Echo that this has the unfortunate consequence of meaning that family court is not hugely transparent.

Both studies saw judges, social workers, experts and victims, including children, participate, with observations of courtrooms also forming part of the research.

Ms Parkes explained: “We were asked to look at the extent to which views of children were taken into account, and we unsurprisingly found very little impact from children, particularly where court assessors don’t have expertise in the area of domestic violence and the skills to engage with children in that regard.” 

Overall, more people trained specifically in domestic violence would be a huge benefit, she said, as currently “not only are they victims of domestic violence, they’re going through a legal process that perpetrates that violence and can be retraumatising".

“They can potentially be cross examined by the perpetrator, if they’re self-representing, and for some people it’s a very traumatic experience and they often don’t get to have support in the courtroom."

Under domestic violence legislation victims are not automatically entitled to accompaniment in court, "they have to get the consent of a judge, and the judge will ask the perpetrator if they’re happy for the victim to be accompanied”. 

Additionally, despite the huge focus on privacy, court buildings do not lend themselves to it. “In courts on any given day, legal counsel will be consulting with their clients in corridors which undermines this privacy we’re trying to protect.

“People who don’t want to give contact with their children to a former partner because they’re worried the children will be harmed, or they don’t want to have to facilitate the contact and see the other person – they will be having that conversation across the corridor from the perpetrator.” 

Ms Parkes explained that Ireland has a “pro-contact culture”, meaning judges believe it is in the best interest of children to see both parents. 

“While this is true in most cases, in situations of domestic violence it is not the case. If children have witnessed domestic violence it can be very upsetting for them to be forced to be in contact with the other parent," she said.

“I have no doubt that people experiencing domestic violence who don’t have any form of support from organisations like Women’s Aid wouldn’t be in a position to go through the family law courts.

“Victims/survivors are vulnerable, often lacking in confidence, and I don’t think it would be easy to take that first step. When they realise what’s involved in going to court and a lot of the barriers within the system, that can hinder them from taking that first step.” 

She added that one person they spoke to as part of their research said: “Sometimes I wonder would it have been easier to stay with the perpetrator rather than go through all of this.”

41646550