Scratching the Surface — and the Governance Questions Beneath It

The publication of Scratching the Surface: Evidence of Victim-Blaming and Bias in Family Court Judgments represents an important contribution to the ongoing discussion about domestic abuse, participation, and fairness within family justice.

The report's findings are difficult to ignore.

Analysis of 91 published judgments identified language and reasoning consistent with victim-blaming, stereotyping, and gender-based bias in a substantial proportion of cases reviewed. It highlights concerns around credibility assessments, the minimisation of coercive control, and inconsistent approaches to understanding trauma.

Most importantly, the report identifies a wider structural concern:

There is currently no formal mechanism to ensure that decisions are grounded in complete, verified disclosure of relevant information, nor a consistent process for identifying potential bias within decision-making.

This is where the conversation must now move beyond diagnosis.

Training matters.

Awareness matters.

Transparency matters.

But governance matters too.

The challenge facing family justice is not solely whether bias exists. It is whether institutions possess the structures necessary to minimise the conditions in which bias, incomplete disclosure, safeguarding failures, and participation barriers can influence outcomes.

Questions therefore remain:

• How is disclosure verified?

• How is vulnerability recorded and preserved across agencies?

• How is participation impairment identified and addressed?

• How are safeguarding concerns tracked across institutional boundaries?

• How are decisions audited when concerns arise?

These are not simply judicial questions.

They are governance questions.

Reports such as Scratching the Surface help identify patterns and provide valuable evidence for reform discussions. The next stage is developing operational frameworks capable of supporting transparency, accountability, participation, safeguarding continuity, and evidential integrity across the wider system.

Identifying the problem is essential.

Designing systems capable of preventing its recurrence is the challenge that follows.

That is where the future debate on family justice reform may increasingly focus: not only on recognising bias after the fact, but on creating structures that support fair, transparent, evidence-based decision-making from the outset.

— Samantha Avril-Andreassen
Founder, SAFECHAIN™
Author | Researcher | Safeguarding Framework Developer | Systems Innovator