The Cost of Human Suffering

Systemic Failures in the UK Response to Domestic Abuse

Author: Samantha Avril-Andreassen
Policy Paper – 2026

Executive Summary

Domestic abuse in the United Kingdom remains a significant public health, criminal justice, and social welfare issue. While legislative reforms such as the Domestic Abuse Act 2021 have improved recognition of coercive and controlling behaviour, survivors continue to encounter systemic failures across institutions responsible for safeguarding.

Police forces, family courts, housing authorities, the NHS, social services, and financial regulators often operate in isolation rather than through coordinated safeguarding systems.

This fragmentation can result in:

• delayed intervention

• inconsistent recognition of coercive control

• financial exploitation during divorce proceedings

• inadequate support for victims experiencing trauma or PTSD.

In extreme cases, these systemic gaps contribute to severe mental health deterioration and suicide among victims of domestic abuse.

This paper examines structural weaknesses in the current system and proposes policy reforms aimed at strengthening coordination, accountability, and survivor protection.

1. Domestic Abuse as a Cross-Institutional Safeguarding Issue

Domestic abuse is not solely a criminal matter but a multi-agency safeguarding issue.

Key institutions involved include:

• police services

• family courts

• housing authorities

• NHS and primary healthcare providers

• child and adult social services

• financial regulators and tax authorities.

Despite shared responsibilities, these institutions often operate in silos, leading to fragmented responses.

Survivors frequently report that they must repeat their experiences multiple times to different agencies, often without effective information sharing between institutions.

2. Suicide and Domestic Abuse

Domestic abuse is strongly associated with severe psychological harm, including:

• depression

• complex trauma

• post-traumatic stress disorder

• suicidal ideation.

Studies from UK domestic abuse charities suggest that many women who die by suicide have a history of domestic abuse, though these deaths are rarely formally classified as domestic-abuse-related fatalities.

Recent prosecutions have begun to recognise the role of psychological abuse in cases where victims take their own lives.

In some cases, perpetrators have faced criminal charges when their behaviour was found to have contributed directly to the victim’s death.

However, such prosecutions remain rare and typically occur only after tragedy has occurred, highlighting the need for earlier intervention.

3. Recognition of Coercive Control

One of the most significant legal developments in recognising coercive control was the appeal case of Sally Challen.

Challen had experienced decades of psychological manipulation and coercive behaviour from her husband before killing him. Her conviction was later reduced after the court accepted evidence that coercive control had significantly affected her mental state.

The case helped raise national awareness of coercive control and influenced the legal recognition of psychological abuse within domestic abuse law.

However, the case also demonstrated how trauma and coercive control are still poorly understood within legal proceedings.

4. Trauma, PTSD, and the Legal System

Domestic abuse can cause long-term psychological injury.

Many survivors experience:

• PTSD

• complex trauma

• cognitive and emotional impairment following prolonged abuse.

Despite this, trauma responses are not always recognised appropriately within legal settings.

In adversarial court environments, survivors may appear:

• inconsistent

• emotional

• or overwhelmed.

These behaviours can be misinterpreted rather than recognised as trauma responses.

Greater trauma-informed training within legal institutions is therefore essential.

5. Financial Abuse and Divorce Litigation

Financial abuse is increasingly recognised as a major component of coercive control.

During separation or divorce proceedings, perpetrators may attempt to:

• conceal assets

• manipulate company structures

• delay legal proceedings to exhaust the victim’s financial resources.

Such behaviour can extend abuse long after the relationship ends.

The current financial disclosure process within family courts relies heavily on the honesty of the parties involved, making it vulnerable to manipulation in complex financial cases.

6. Institutional Disconnect

A key theme identified in survivor testimony is the lack of coordination between institutions.

Examples include:

Police
incidents recorded but not shared with courts.

Healthcare
evidence of trauma documented but rarely integrated into legal decision-making.

Housing services
survivors facing homelessness while legal proceedings continue.

Social services
trauma responses sometimes misinterpreted as parental instability.

This disconnect leaves survivors navigating complex bureaucratic systems while experiencing severe psychological stress.

7. Policy Recommendations

To address these systemic failures, the following reforms are proposed.

1. Cross-Agency Information Systems

Develop integrated safeguarding systems enabling data sharing between:

• police

• healthcare providers

• courts

• housing authorities

• social services.

2. Trauma-Informed Court Procedures

Introduce mandatory trauma-informed training for:

• judges

• barristers

• solicitors

• court staff.

3. Strengthened Financial Disclosure

Improve financial transparency during divorce proceedings by strengthening links between family courts and:

• Companies House

• HMRC

• financial investigators.

4. Recognition of Suicide Risk

Domestic abuse risk assessments should include evaluation of suicide risk, enabling earlier intervention.

5. Survivor-Centred Safeguarding Framework

Shift from fragmented institutional responses to a coordinated survivor-centred safeguarding model.

Conclusion

Domestic abuse is not merely an interpersonal issue but a systemic governance challenge.

Legislative reforms such as the Domestic Abuse Act 2021 represent progress, yet institutional fragmentation continues to undermine the protection of survivors.

Without stronger coordination between police, healthcare, courts, housing authorities, and social services, the system risks failing those it is intended to protect.

Preventing further tragedies requires not only stronger laws but structural reform of the institutions responsible for safeguarding vulnerable individuals.