25 signatures reached
To: The Hon Michelle Rowland MP, Attorney-General of Australia, Senator the Hon Katy Gallagher, Minister for Women; the Minister for Social Services Micaela Cronin, and the Domestic, Family and Sexual Violence Commission. 
Court-Ordered Harm Must End
I am calling for a complete overhaul of the Australian Family Court system. Incremental reform is no longer sufficient. The system, as it currently operates, is causing harm to children and protective parents and repeatedly failing to identify, respond to, and prevent family violence.
My experience navigating the Family Court as a protective parent has exposed not isolated errors, but systemic dysfunction — failures that are predictable, repeatable, and widely documented, yet continue unchecked.
The Family Court operates under a model that prioritises parental rights and access over child safety, minimises domestic and family violence, and relies on unregulated, unaccountable services to make life-altering decisions for children.
1. Domestic violence is structurally minimised
Despite overwhelming evidence that separation is the most dangerous period for victims and children, domestic violence is routinely reframed as “conflict” or “relationship issues.” Coercive control, post-separation abuse, and patterns of intimidation are misunderstood or ignored. This failure is not accidental — it is embedded in the culture, training, and decision-making frameworks of the court.
2. Violent parents are granted access to children
Parents with documented histories of violence, substance misuse, criminal behaviour, and breaches are frequently granted supervised and then unsupervised time with children. Courts rely on assurances rather than demonstrated behavioural change. The result is children being placed in unsafe environments under the guise of “meaningful relationships.”
3. Criminal matters and bail are treated as irrelevant
Family Court proceedings operate in isolation from criminal justice realities. Parents on bail, under investigation, or facing serious charges are still permitted access to children without automatic risk reassessment. This separation of systems directly endangers children and undermines public confidence.
Parents with documented histories of violence, substance misuse, criminal behaviour, and breaches are frequently granted supervised and then unsupervised time with children. Courts rely on assurances rather than demonstrated behavioural change. The result is children being placed in unsafe environments under the guise of “meaningful relationships.”
3. Criminal matters and bail are treated as irrelevant
Family Court proceedings operate in isolation from criminal justice realities. Parents on bail, under investigation, or facing serious charges are still permitted access to children without automatic risk reassessment. This separation of systems directly endangers children and undermines public confidence.
4. Contact centres are not fit for purpose
Contact centres are routinely used as a safety solution despite being under-resourced, inconsistently regulated, and lacking enforcement power. Concerning behaviour is documented but not acted upon. Children’s distress is normalised. Reports are often vague, delayed, or framed to minimise liability rather than protect children.
Contact centres are routinely used as a safety solution despite being under-resourced, inconsistently regulated, and lacking enforcement power. Concerning behaviour is documented but not acted upon. Children’s distress is normalised. Reports are often vague, delayed, or framed to minimise liability rather than protect children.
5. Family report writers wield excessive power without accountability
Family report writers produce opinions that carry extraordinary weight despite limited observation, inconsistent methodologies, and frequent disregard for corroborating evidence. Protective parents are pathologised as anxious or hostile, while perpetrators are rewarded for superficial compliance. There are minimal mechanisms to challenge flawed reports, even when they contradict expert evidence or documented risk.
Family report writers produce opinions that carry extraordinary weight despite limited observation, inconsistent methodologies, and frequent disregard for corroborating evidence. Protective parents are pathologised as anxious or hostile, while perpetrators are rewarded for superficial compliance. There are minimal mechanisms to challenge flawed reports, even when they contradict expert evidence or documented risk.
6. Expert evidence on family violence is ignored
Contemporary research and expert frameworks — including the work of Dr [Proudman] and the UPP — clearly outline how the Family Court system fails victims and children. These findings are repeatedly acknowledged in theory and ignored in practice. The system continues to rely on outdated models that prioritise shared parenting ideology over child safety.
7. Protective parents are punished
Contemporary research and expert frameworks — including the work of Dr [Proudman] and the UPP — clearly outline how the Family Court system fails victims and children. These findings are repeatedly acknowledged in theory and ignored in practice. The system continues to rely on outdated models that prioritise shared parenting ideology over child safety.
7. Protective parents are punished
Parents who raise safety concerns are accused of being uncooperative, obstructive, or engaging in alienation. This silences victims and discourages disclosure. Mothers, in particular, are disproportionately disbelieved and penalised for attempting to protect their children.
What a Complete Overhaul Must Include
What a Complete Overhaul Must Include
A complete overhaul of the Family Court must involve:
1:Child safety as the overriding, enforceable principle — not merely stated in legislation but embedded in every decision.
2:Mandatory, evidence-based domestic violence training for all judicial officers, lawyers, report writers, and court-appointed professionals.
3:Automatic suspension or review of contact where there are active criminal charges, bail conditions, or credible risk indicators.
4:Independent regulation, oversight, and auditing of contact centres, with enforceable standards and consequences.
5:Strict accountability frameworks for family report writers, including transparent methodologies, peer review, and genuine avenues for challenge.
6:Integration of criminal and family law systems so that risk is assessed holistically, not in silos
6:Removal of discredited concepts that undermine child safety and silence victims.
7:Genuine consideration of children’s voices and lived experience, not filtered through adult assumptions
.8:Independent oversight and complaints mechanisms with real power to act
.9:A cultural shift away from parental entitlement and toward child protection.
1:Child safety as the overriding, enforceable principle — not merely stated in legislation but embedded in every decision.
2:Mandatory, evidence-based domestic violence training for all judicial officers, lawyers, report writers, and court-appointed professionals.
3:Automatic suspension or review of contact where there are active criminal charges, bail conditions, or credible risk indicators.
4:Independent regulation, oversight, and auditing of contact centres, with enforceable standards and consequences.
5:Strict accountability frameworks for family report writers, including transparent methodologies, peer review, and genuine avenues for challenge.
6:Integration of criminal and family law systems so that risk is assessed holistically, not in silos
6:Removal of discredited concepts that undermine child safety and silence victims.
7:Genuine consideration of children’s voices and lived experience, not filtered through adult assumptions
.8:Independent oversight and complaints mechanisms with real power to act
.9:A cultural shift away from parental entitlement and toward child protection.
Children should not have to be harmed before they are believed.
Protective parents should not be punished for doing the right thing.
A court tasked with protecting children must not be a place where risk is normalised and violence is excused.
I am calling for a complete overhaul of the Family Court system to ensure it finally fulfils its fundamental responsibility: keeping children safe.
Why is this important?
This issue is important because the failures of the Family Court do not exist in isolation — they directly contribute to unsafe conditions for women and children.
Australia has no shortage of inquiries, coronial inquests, and expert reports showing that domestic and family violence is a leading cause of serious harm and death. Yet the Family Court continues to make decisions that expose women and children to known risks, particularly after separation…. the most dangerous time for victims.
When violence is minimised, when perpetrators are granted access despite warning signs, when contact centres fail to act, and when protective parents are disbelieved, the system becomes an active participant in harm. They create conditions where abuse escalates, where children are traumatised, and where women and children are killed.
Too often, the warning signs are visible in hindsight:
• ignored disclosures
• dismissed fears
• court-ordered contact despite risk
• a system more concerned with parental entitlement than safety
The Family Court has the power to interrupt violence, but instead, it frequently enables it.
This is not only a family law issue. It is a public safety issue, a women’s safety issue, and a child protection issue. When state systems fail to respond to violence, responsibility does not disappear, it shifts onto victims, often with fatal consequences.
People should join this campaign because silence allows this to continue. Because every time the system fails to act on risk, it sends a message that violence can be excused, minimised, or endured. Because reform delayed is harm repeated.
Change is necessary to prevent further deaths, to protect children before they are harmed, and to ensure women are not forced to choose between complying with court orders and keeping themselves and their children safe.
This campaign is about accountability, prevention, and saving lives.