Five Years of Silence

The Domestic Abuse Act Changed the Law. But It Did Not Change the System.

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

In April 2026, I wrote to the Home Office.

I wrote to the Victims' Commissioner.

I wrote to the Domestic Abuse Commissioner.

Each office responded.

Each acknowledged the importance of tackling domestic abuse.

Each recognised that violence against women and girls remains a national priority.

Yet despite different wording, every response conveyed the same underlying message:

Not now. Not here. Not through us.

That correspondence was not simply disappointing. It illustrated one of the greatest challenges facing safeguarding today.

The law has changed.

The institutions have not.

Five years after the Domestic Abuse Act 2021 became law, the operational infrastructure needed to deliver its promise still does not exist.

The Law Exists. The Infrastructure Does Not.

The Domestic Abuse Act 2021 represented one of the most significant reforms of domestic abuse legislation in a generation.

It formally recognised coercive and controlling behaviour.

It acknowledged economic abuse as a form of domestic abuse.

It strengthened statutory duties and established the office of the Domestic Abuse Commissioner.

The legislation marked a major step forward.

Yet legislation alone does not transform systems.

Laws establish obligations.

Infrastructure determines whether those obligations are delivered in practice.

Five years later, survivors continue to encounter many of the same barriers because the systems responsible for implementing the legislation remain fragmented.

The result is a troubling contradiction.

The legal framework has evolved.

The operational framework has not.

The Silo Effect

One of the greatest obstacles to effective safeguarding is not a lack of commitment.

It is institutional fragmentation.

Courts hold one set of information.

Banks hold another.

HMRC holds another.

Police maintain separate records.

Housing providers, regulators, healthcare services and local authorities each maintain their own systems.

Rarely do these systems communicate effectively with one another.

The consequence is that no single organisation ever sees the complete picture.

Patterns of coercive control develop over years.

Financial abuse often begins long before separation.

Assets are transferred.

Debts are created.

Companies are established.

Property interests change.

Each event may appear insignificant when viewed in isolation.

Collectively, they reveal a coordinated pattern of abuse.

Unfortunately, fragmented systems are designed to examine isolated events rather than cumulative patterns.

This allows perpetrators to exploit institutional gaps while survivors are repeatedly required to explain their circumstances to every new organisation they encounter.

The Evidence Is Already There

The problem is not the absence of information.

It is the inability to connect it.

Evidence often already exists across multiple institutions.

Financial records.

Police reports.

Mortgage histories.

Court documents.

Regulatory findings.

Healthcare records.

Housing files.

Each organisation may possess part of the truth.

Almost none possess all of it.

Without mechanisms to integrate this information, decision-makers continue making life-changing decisions using incomplete evidence.

The result is predictable.

Incomplete information produces incomplete justice.

What Institutional Responses Reveal

The correspondence I received during 2026 revealed something significant.

None of the organisations disputed the importance of the issues raised.

None rejected the need for systemic reform.

Instead, each response reflected organisational boundaries.

The Home Office referred to procurement processes.

The Victims' Commissioner directed attention elsewhere.

The Domestic Abuse Commissioner's Office explained that strategic planning was underway.

Viewed individually, these responses were entirely reasonable.

Viewed collectively, they demonstrated precisely the challenge SAFECHAIN™ seeks to address.

Every organisation remained responsible only for its own part of the system.

No organisation owned responsibility for connecting them.

SAFECHAIN™ Was Built to Close That Gap

SAFECHAIN™ is not simply an awareness campaign.

It is not solely a safeguarding initiative.

It is a governance framework designed to connect institutions that already possess the information needed to improve outcomes.

The objective is straightforward.

Information should move.

Not survivors.

Instead of requiring vulnerable individuals to repeatedly retell traumatic experiences to disconnected organisations, relevant safeguarding information should travel securely between authorised institutions where lawful and appropriate.

SAFECHAIN™ proposes governance mechanisms capable of supporting that objective through cross-institutional collaboration, accountability and evidence continuity.

Its framework recognises that safeguarding cannot depend upon isolated organisational decisions.

It requires connected governance.

From Experience to Systems Reform

SAFECHAIN™ was not developed solely through academic research.

Nor was it created within government.

It emerged through lived experience combined with legal education, governance analysis and extensive research into institutional safeguarding failures.

The work behind SAFECHAIN™ now spans substantial published research, policy papers, governance frameworks, training methodologies and practical proposals designed to improve institutional practice.

Its purpose is not simply to identify problems.

Its purpose is to provide workable solutions capable of strengthening safeguarding across multiple sectors.

The Next Five Years

The Domestic Abuse Act created the legal foundation.

The evidence now exists.

The need is widely recognised.

The remaining challenge is implementation.

The question facing institutions is no longer whether reform is necessary.

It is whether organisations are prepared to work together to build the operational infrastructure capable of delivering the protections Parliament intended.

SAFECHAIN™ represents one possible answer to that challenge.

Because legislation changes systems only when institutions are equipped to make it operational.

Until then, survivors remain caught between organisations that each fulfil part of their responsibilities while no one connects the whole.

The next chapter of safeguarding must therefore focus not only on changing laws, but on changing how institutions work together.

That is where meaningful reform begins.

Copyright Notice

© 2026 SAFE-CHAINN Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

Five Years of Silence: The Domestic Abuse Act Changed the Law. But It Did Not Change the System. is an original policy analysis and publication developed by Samantha Avril-Andreassen FRSA, Founder of SAFECHAIN™.

This publication, including its analysis, structure, terminology, frameworks, concepts, governance principles and written content, is protected by copyright and intellectual property law.

SAFECHAIN™, SAFECHAIN™ frameworks, methodologies, policy models, governance architectures and associated intellectual property may not be reproduced, adapted, distributed, commercially exploited or implemented without prior written permission from SAFE-CHAINN Ltd.

Permitted use includes limited quotation for research, commentary, academic discussion or review purposes with appropriate attribution.