New guidance on alienating behaviours will not prevent harm in the Family Court

Women survivors of abuse and their children still likely to suffer unjust decisions about contact with an abusive father under new rules 

The Family Justice Council (FJC) has published new guidance on ‘alienating behaviours’ in an attempt to prevent harm being caused to women and children by poor decision-making in children cases.  

In recent years there has been an increase in allegations of alienation in the Family Court. This is partly due to the Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service (Cafcass) promoting beliefs about ‘parental alienation’ in guidance published in 2018, subsequently adopted by the Family Court. The FJC accepts that there is a lack of research evidence and the beliefs have attracted international condemnation. However, they have proceeded to adopt the language of ‘alienation’ and set out guidance without an appropriate evidence-base. 

Our experience of advising women survivors has shown that the use of allegations of alienation are an effective tool to further litigation abuse by controlling fathers. Allegations of alienation lead to: 

• The minimisation or ignoring of domestic abuse, sexual violence and child sexual abuse 

• The undermining of the child’s own experience of their other parent 

• The targeted scrutiny of the mother’s parenting to a point where anything can be interpreted as ‘alienating’ 

In addition to this, there is a pro-contact culture within the Family Court, identified by the Harm Report that leads professionals to minimise domestic abuse and ignore children’s experiences, including when they report child sexual abuse. It is within this culture that this guidance will be implemented. 

Olive Craig, Senior Legal Officer at Rights of Women said today: 

“By endorsing ‘alienating behaviours’, the FJC only gives credence to the beliefs that underpin it despite accepting that they have no evidential basis. We do not believe this guidance will prevent the worst outcomes for survivors of domestic abuse and child sexual abuse. Sadly it will still allow for a child to be removed from a protective parent to live with their abuser. 

While the guidance includes measures that attempt to reduce the likelihood of poor decision-making, we recognise the FJC is constrained by the existing case law which has evolved to accept beliefs about alienation, supported by Cafcass’ previous endorsement of the concept. It is time for the Government to take action to ensure the Family Court is focused on the protection of adult and child survivors or domestic abuse.” 

Rights of Women is calling on the Government to: 

1. Introduce a legal presumption against contact in cases of domestic abuse, sexual violence or child sexual abuse.
2. Introduce a duty on the court to hear the views of the child in every case before making a decision about them.
3. Prohibit the removal of a child from their resident parent for the purpose of re-starting or improving the child’s relationship with the other parent. 

Without the implementation of these measures, the Family Court will continue to make unsafe orders for adult and child survivors of domestic abuse and this guidance will not prevent that from happening.