The Intersection of Domestic Violence and Child Custody

GGS-006

GLOBAL GOVERNANCE SERIES™

The Intersection of Domestic Violence and Child Custody

What Family Justice Systems Can Learn from the United States

By Samantha Avril-Andreassen, LLB (Hons), LLM, LPC, FRSA

Founder, SAFECHAIN™

Abstract

Domestic violence remains one of the most significant challenges confronting family justice systems worldwide. While legal frameworks differ across jurisdictions, recurring concerns emerge regarding the ability of courts to recognise coercive control, assess risk accurately, protect children, and ensure meaningful participation for survivors.

In the United States, child custody proceedings involving intimate partner violence (IPV) have become the subject of extensive research, legislative reform, and advocacy. Fact sheets, judicial guidance, and multidisciplinary resources have sought to improve judicial understanding of domestic abuse and its impact on parenting arrangements. Yet survivors and practitioners continue to report inconsistent outcomes, difficulties proving coercive control, misuse of allegations of parental alienation, and ongoing post-separation abuse through litigation.

This paper examines the American experience within a broader comparative governance framework. It argues that many of the challenges identified in the United States are mirrored across family justice systems internationally, suggesting that the principal challenge is not simply one of law, but of institutional capability.

Introduction

Every family justice system begins with the same aspiration: to protect children while ensuring fair decision-making for parents.

Where domestic violence is present, however, that objective becomes considerably more complex.

Custody decisions require courts to assess risk, evaluate evidence, understand family dynamics, and predict future harm. Those assessments become particularly difficult where abuse consists not primarily of physical violence but of coercive control, psychological abuse, economic abuse, intimidation, surveillance, and post-separation litigation.

Across the United States, these issues have generated increasing concern among survivors, researchers, judges, lawyers, and policymakers.

Although American family law differs from the legal framework of England and Wales, many of the underlying governance challenges are remarkably similar.

Domestic Violence and Child Custody

Research consistently demonstrates that children living with domestic violence may experience harm even where they are not themselves the direct targets of physical abuse.

Exposure to coercive control may affect:

• emotional development;

• educational attainment;

• mental health;

• attachment;

• behavioural regulation;

• long-term physical health;

• perceptions of relationships and safety.

Consequently, child custody proceedings involving domestic violence require courts to consider not only parental rights but also the cumulative impact of abusive behaviour on children's welfare.

The challenge lies in recognising abuse that may not always leave visible injuries.

The Recognition Problem

Many American advocacy organisations describe a recurring concern.

Domestic violence may be documented within proceedings yet not fundamentally alter custody outcomes.

Several factors contribute to this difficulty.

These include:

• inconsistent understanding of coercive control;

• differing evidential standards;

• fragmented information across agencies;

• competing expert opinions;

• emphasis upon co-parenting despite allegations of abuse;

• misunderstanding trauma responses;

• limited judicial training.

These challenges are not unique to the United States.

Comparable concerns have been raised in numerous jurisdictions, including England and Wales, Canada, Australia and elsewhere.

The Parental Alienation Debate

One of the most controversial aspects of custody litigation concerns allegations that one parent is deliberately undermining a child's relationship with the other.

Courts must distinguish carefully between two fundamentally different situations:

• unjustified interference with a child's relationship with a parent; and

• protective actions taken in response to genuine abuse or safeguarding concerns.

Failure to distinguish these circumstances accurately may place children and protective parents at increased risk.

This remains an area of significant legal and academic debate across multiple jurisdictions.

Post-Separation Abuse

Ending a relationship does not necessarily end abuse.

Research increasingly recognises post-separation abuse as an extension of coercive control.

This may include:

• repeated litigation;

• financial pressure;

• manipulation of parenting arrangements;

• harassment;

• misuse of communication platforms;

• reputational attacks;

• repeated allegations;

• procedural delay.

Family courts therefore become not merely forums for resolving disputes but potential environments in which abusive behaviour may continue if not recognised and managed effectively.

Lessons for Governance

The American experience demonstrates that legislative reform alone is insufficient.

Improving outcomes requires institutional capability.

Effective systems require professionals capable of:

• recognising coercive control;

• identifying cumulative behavioural patterns;

• understanding trauma;

• integrating safeguarding information;

• distinguishing conflict from abuse;

• supporting meaningful participation;

• ensuring accountability throughout proceedings.

Without these capabilities, domestic violence may remain documented but insufficiently reflected within judicial decision-making.

The SAFECHAIN™ Perspective

SAFECHAIN™ approaches domestic violence through governance rather than jurisdiction.

Whether proceedings occur in the United States, England and Wales, Australia, Canada, Brazil or elsewhere, similar institutional questions arise.

Can the system:

• recognise vulnerability?

• connect fragmented information?

• verify disclosure?

• support effective participation?

• identify behavioural patterns?

• measure safeguarding performance?

The answers to these questions determine whether legal protections become practical protections.

Conclusion

The challenges facing family justice in the United States are not uniquely American.

They reflect broader international questions concerning recognition, safeguarding, participation, and institutional capability.

As understanding of domestic violence continues to evolve, future reform should focus not only upon legislation but upon improving the systems responsible for implementing it.

Children's safety depends not merely upon the existence of legal protections.

It depends upon institutions possessing the capability to recognise harm, assess risk, coordinate information, and translate safeguarding duties into consistent action.

That is the governance challenge facing family justice systems worldwide.

Copyright

© 2026 Samantha Avril-Andreassen. All rights reserved.

SAFECHAINN Ltd (Company No. 12038453)

This publication forms part of the **SAFECHAIN™ Global Governance Series™.

GGS-006 – The Intersection of Domestic Violence and Child Custody: What Family Justice Systems Can Learn from the United States**

No part of this publication may be reproduced, adapted, distributed, incorporated into governance frameworks, educational programmes, artificial intelligence systems, institutional policies, software, or commercial products without the prior written permission of the copyright holder, except as permitted by applicable copyright law for criticism, review, or academic research.

Version 1.0