Domestic and Family Violence and Private Family Report Writing Practice in the Australian Family Law System: A Study

Abstract

In Australia, family reports are an influential expert assessment of a family usually undertaken in contentious family law parenting matters by social workers or psychologists, known as family report writers. This article presents findings from in-depth interviews with 10 private family report writers about their experience of undertaking assessments, particularly in cases where domestic and family violence is alleged. The study reveals a number of concerns that mirror the findings of previous Australian and international research in this area. For example, concerns were raised about the quality and efficacy of training and access to other resources, professional isolation, the efficacy of the family report assessment process, and divergence in understandings of domestic and family violence. A critical issue raised in the study relates to the pro-contact and co-parenting culture of the Australian family law system, which can significantly impact the family report writing process and may have repercussions for the safety of victims of domestic and family violence and their children. Responding to and drawing from the family report writers’ lived experiences, we offer suggestions for reform that aim to improve the efficacy of the family report assessment process and therefore the justice and safety of outcomes in matters where a family report is deemed necessary.

Mothers’ Post-separation Experiences of Male Partner Abuse: An Exploratory Study

“…The most recent review of the 2012 Family Law Act amendments 1 , conducted by the Australian Institute for Family Studies (Kaspiew et al, 2015), revealed that almost one third of parents being surveyed about their experiences of Family Law proceedings had reportedly never been asked about IPV or related safety concerns throughout the process. While the most recent reforms stipulate that IPV needs to be identified early in the process to better protect women in the actual hearing, cases of re-traumatisation as part of the proceeding still occur (Douglas, 2018; Jeffries, Field, Menih, & Rathus, 2016). This may partly be the result of many couples not being asked about IPV during the early stages of family law proceedings and the assumption in the legal paradigm that situational couple violence (SCV) occurs as a result of mutual conflict, which has minimal impact (Jeffries et al, 2016; Meier, 2015).…”

“…While the most recent reforms stipulate that IPV needs to be identified early in the process to better protect women in the actual hearing, cases of re-traumatisation as part of the proceeding still occur (Douglas, 2018; Jeffries, Field, Menih, & Rathus, 2016). This may partly be the result of many couples not being asked about IPV during the early stages of family law proceedings and the assumption in the legal paradigm that situational couple violence (SCV) occurs as a result of mutual conflict, which has minimal impact (Jeffries et al, 2016; Meier, 2015).…”

“…She stated that Johnson’s typology of SCV has become ‘the new mantra in family law practice’ (p. 8), which appeals to the family court as it provides justification for omitting concern in relation to parenting arrangement rulings. Given the assumption that IPV is ‘not terribly concerning’ (Meier, 2015, p. 12) when making parenting orders, it is not surprising that most children exposed to IPV continue to remain in contact with the abusive parent because the violence and abuse does not end when the victim-survivor ends the relationship (Jeffries et al, 2016; Laing, 2017).…”

“…Victimised women experience abuse by their ex-partners after separation (Douglas, 2018; Jeffries et al, 2016; Laing, 2017; Shalansky et al, 1999). This includes control and manipulation (Laing, 2017) and children being frequently used as tools in this ongoing process of maintaining power and control over the mothers (Jaffe, Fairbairn & Reif, 2017; Jeffries et al, 2016).…”

“…Victimised women experience abuse by their ex-partners after separation (Douglas, 2018; Jeffries et al, 2016; Laing, 2017; Shalansky et al, 1999). This includes control and manipulation (Laing, 2017) and children being frequently used as tools in this ongoing process of maintaining power and control over the mothers (Jaffe, Fairbairn & Reif, 2017; Jeffries et al, 2016). These ongoing power and abuse dynamics have a detrimental impact on the victimised women whose ability to parent is often affected by an everyday struggle to cope with ongoing abuse and in attempts to protect their children.…”