Nineteen Child Homicides report out

We must have change now.

The Nineteen Child Homicide report launched recently by Women’s Aid reviewed relevant serious case reviews for England and Wales, published between January 2005 and August 2015.

It uncovered details of 19 children in 12 families who were killed by perpetrators of domestic abuse.

All of the perpetrators were men and they were all the fathers of the children that they killed.

And all of the perpetrators had access to their children through formal or informal child contact arrangements.

In the report’s foreward, Polly Neate, Women’s Aid chief executive, said: ‘This report should not need to be written, that much is disturbingly obvious.

First, while it is impossible to prevent every killing of a child, when the risks are known no other consideration should be more important – yet there is evidence here that other considerations were rated more highly.

Second, starkly similar findings more than 10 years ago led to the publication of guidance which, if followed, would have made these killings less likely. Yet here we are.

Nothing in this report should be used to blame individual professionals for the deaths of these children. Only those who killed them deserve blame.

But we have a duty to the children and their families to identify what more should have been done to protect them – particularly when guidance on how to do so has been available since 2008, following the publication of Women’s Aid’s previous report on child homicides and child contact arrangements, a decade ago.

This report shows, that whatever the stated requirements on the family courts, there is a deeply embedded culture that pushes for contact with fathers at all costs.

This is supported by the testimony to Women’s Aid of mothers who have survived domestic abuse and the specialist services that support them.

The knowledge that severe abuse has taken place does not stop this relentless push to maintain as close a bond between father and child as possible.

A father who has abused his child(ren)’s mother is routinely seen as a “good enough” dad.

The impact of abuse on the whole family, particularly persistent, coercive and controlling behaviour which continues after the relationship has officially ended, is routinely misunderstood.

The evidence here is a stark reminder of the dangers of power without accountability: perpetrators of abuse who have accumulated all power over their partners’ and children’s lives, and courts which persist in dangerous misunderstandings and assumptions, effectively colluding in the terrorising – and in some cases serious harm – of women and children.

We call on Government and the senior judiciary to ensure that no more children die as a result of a simple failure to follow the guidance that exists.

We call on judges to take responsibility for their own understanding of coercive control, how it works, and how it affects both women and children. And then, finally, to act on that understanding.

In another ten years, we must not yet again be repeating the same investigation, with the same findings. In fact, of course, ten years is far too long.’

The report recommends:

The importance of recognising domestic abuse as harm to children

The Government and senior leaders in the family courts and Cafcass need to take action to bring about cultural change within the family court system to ensure that the safety and wellbeing of child(ren) and non-abusive parents are understood and consistently prioritised.

Children should always be listened to and their safety must always be at the heart of any child contact decision made by the family court judges.

Children’s experiences of domestic abuse and its impact on them should always be fully considered by the family court judiciary with an acknowledgment that post-separation abuse is commonly experienced by non-abusive parents.

The Ministry of Justice must ensure that all family courts including judges and involved statutory agencies are aware of and fully implement Practice Direction 12J.

The Government needs to urgently review whether the current workings of the family courts are upholding the human rights of children and non-abusive parents and whether the family courts are fulfilling the State’s obligations under Article 2 (The right to life) and Article 3 (No torture, inhuman or degrading treatment) of the Human Rights Act 1998and Article 31 (Custody, visitation rights and safety) of the Council of Europe Convention on Preventing and Combating Violence Against Women and Domestic Violence34.

2. Professional understanding of the power and control dynamics of domestic abuse and 3. Understanding parental separation as a risk factor.

All members of the family court judiciary and Cafcass should have specialist training to understand the dynamics of domestic abuse and be able to recognise coercive control.

The Ministry of Justice and family court judiciary should ensure that survivors of domestic abuse representing themselves in court as LIPs will not be questioned by their abuser, or in turn have to question their abuser.

4. The way in which statutory agencies interact with families where there is domestic abuse

There must be improved communication and information sharing between the family courts and statutory agencies, including the police, health services, social care and schools.

There must be better information sharing between statutory agencies about domestic abuse that includes a focus on the risks to children.

Statutory agencies must enquire about any children affected by domestic abuse when they receive a disclosure or evidence of abuse and pass information on to relevant child and adult support and protection agencies.

Statutory agency professionals, such as social workers, police officers, GPs, nurses and teachers, should receive specialist training and ongoing professional development on domestic abuse.

5. Supporting non-abusive parents and challenging abusive parents

The Ministry of Justice and family court judiciary should ensure there is improved communication between the family courts and criminal courts.

Family courts must ensure there is better access for survivors of domestic abuse to special measures for their protection during hearings.

Family court judiciary should ensure there is no unsupervised contact for a parent who is awaiting trial for domestic abuse related offences or where there are ongoing criminal proceedings for domestic abuse

And it suggests that in further investigation:

There must be further detailed investigation of the issues highlighted in our findings which will require better data collection and monitoring of cases of domestic abuse in the family courts;

The Ministry of Justice must set up a process for independent, national oversight, with a clear reporting mechanism, into the implementation of Practice Direction 12J and into the handling and outcomes of family court cases involving domestic abuse; and

The Ministry of Justice and Local Safeguarding Children Boards must ensure that serious case review reports have a consistent approach and the impact of the recommendations made must be evaluated to ensure we are learning lessons from these tragic cases.

In order to prevent further avoidable child deaths, it is essential that the lessons are learned from the deaths of these 19 children and two women, and that real progress is made.

Please get in touch with your MP and ask them to pledge their support for the Child First campaign.

Please sign this petition and use #ChildFirst to help spread the word.

Together we can put an end to unsafe child contact.