By Lucy Caulkett-
Children caught in private family law disputes in England are suffering serious and lasting harm because their voices are too often ignored, dismissed or filtered through adult assumptions, according to new research that raises profound questions about how the family justice system protects some of its most vulnerable participants.
The study, led by the University of Manchester in partnership with members of the SHERA Research Group and The Survivor Family Network, paints a troubling picture of children whose experiences of abuse, fear and trauma are frequently overlooked in legal proceedings that ultimately determine where they live, who they see and how their futures unfold.
AD: Capeesh Restaurant
Published in the Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law, the research argues that many children are treated not as individuals with rights and perspectives of their own, but as passive subjects whose wishes carry little weight in decisions that directly affect their safety and well-being.
Researchers say the consequences can be profound. Rather than offering protection and stability during periods of intense family conflict, the court process itself may compound children’s emotional distress, undermine their confidence and expose them to continuing harm. In some cases, the study suggests, children emerged from proceedings carrying psychological scars that extended well beyond the courtroom.
The findings are based on an analysis of the experiences of 77 children involved in private family law proceedings, drawing on detailed interviews with 45 mothers whose families had navigated the court system. Using the concept of “childism”—a term describing prejudice and discrimination that diminish or devalue children’s perspectives—the researchers examined how institutional practices can silence children’s voices and reinforce unequal power relationships between adults and children.
AD: Oysterian Sea Food Restaurant And Bar
Their conclusions point to what they describe as systemic failures rather than isolated shortcomings. Throughout the research, children were found to experience a broad spectrum of psychological, emotional and physical health problems during and after family court proceedings. Anxiety, depression, trauma-related symptoms, social withdrawal and disrupted education were commonly reported, while some children experienced eating disorders, developmental regression and other significant health issues.
Particularly alarming were reports that some children expressed suicidal thoughts, highlighting the potentially devastating emotional toll associated with prolonged legal disputes involving allegations of abuse. Researchers argue that these outcomes cannot be understood solely as the result of family breakdown. Instead, they suggest the legal process itself may intensify children’s distress when their fears and experiences are not adequately acknowledged or acted upon.
One of the study’s most striking findings concerns the way children’s accounts of abuse are sometimes interpreted within family court proceedings. According to the research, children who expressed fear of seeing an abusive parent or resisted court-ordered contact were, in many instances, viewed as unreliable witnesses or assumed to have been influenced by their mothers. Their reluctance to engage was sometimes interpreted as evidence of parental manipulation rather than a possible reflection of genuine fear or traumatic experience.
Conversely, children who appeared compliant or remained silent were often presumed to be coping well. Researchers caution that such assumptions can be dangerously misleading. Silence, they argue, should not automatically be interpreted as acceptance or emotional stability. For many children living with trauma, remaining quiet may itself represent a coping mechanism shaped by fear, anxiety or emotional exhaustion.
The study also highlights the heavy emotional burdens some children carry throughout family court proceedings. Researchers found evidence that many young people became, in effect, prematurely adult as they attempted to navigate highly charged family conflicts. Some reportedly assumed inappropriate caring responsibilities for parents or siblings, while others believed they were personally responsible for the outcomes of legal decisions.
In several cases examined by the researchers, children allegedly faced threats that their mothers could be imprisoned if they refused to comply with court orders regarding contact arrangements, adding further emotional pressure to already complex circumstances.
Such findings have prompted renewed concern about whether children’s welfare truly remains the central consideration in private family law proceedings. The research identifies what its authors describe as “institutional silencing” within parts of the family justice system. In some cases, children’s wishes were reportedly summarised by professionals without those professionals speaking directly to the child. Even where children’s views were obtained, researchers found they frequently appeared to exert little influence over the court’s final decisions.
The authors argue this raises significant questions about how effectively the family justice system is implementing children’s rights under the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, which recognises that children capable of forming their own views should have those views given due weight in decisions affecting their lives.
According to the study, participation in family court proceedings often appears more symbolic than meaningful. While children may technically have opportunities to express themselves, researchers argue their voices are frequently filtered through adult interpretations, professional assumptions or legal priorities before reaching the courtroom, diminishing the influence of their lived experiences.
Extending beyond the courtroom itself, the research also identifies emerging concerns surrounding technology and coercive control following parental separation. Some participants described situations in which abusive fathers allegedly used access to children’s medical information or digital systems to monitor family members or maintain patterns of intimidation after relationships had ended.
Researchers describe this as a form of technology-facilitated abuse that they believe remains insufficiently recognised by both legal and health professionals.
They argue that greater awareness of these evolving forms of coercive control is essential if family courts and health services are to provide effective protection for children experiencing ongoing abuse after parental separation. Despite documenting significant shortcomings, the study also identifies examples of effective practice that researchers believe demonstrate how outcomes can improve when children’s needs are genuinely prioritised.
Trauma-informed counselling, play therapy and health professionals who actively protected children’s privacy while listening carefully to their experiences were all identified as positive interventions. According to the research, these child-centred approaches helped many children rebuild confidence, improve emotional well-being and regain a sense of control over their lives after highly stressful family court proceedings.
The findings suggest that when children are treated as active participants rather than passive observers, they are better able to recover from traumatic experiences and engage meaningfully in decisions affecting their future. Lead researcher Dr Elizabeth Dalgarno of the University of Manchester believes the study highlights an urgent need for cultural as well as procedural change within the family justice system.
“Our findings suggest that children are often the least powerful people in proceedings that determine the course of their lives,” she said. “Too often, their experiences of abuse, fear and trauma are filtered through adult assumptions rather than being heard on their own terms.”
Dr Dalgarno welcomed recent government initiatives aimed at creating more child-focused courts but argued there remains considerable scope for reform. She said the family justice system has an opportunity to move beyond viewing children as passive recipients of adult decisions and instead recognise them as individuals with rights, experiences and perspectives deserving meaningful consideration.
“If children’s voices are consistently heard, respected and acted upon,” she said, “family courts will be better able to protect their safety, well-being and long-term health.”
The study’s findings arrive amid continuing debate over the operation of England’s family courts, particularly in cases involving allegations of domestic abuse, coercive control and child contact arrangements. Campaigners have long argued that balancing children’s rights to maintain relationships with both parents against the need to safeguard them from harm remains one of the most difficult challenges facing the family justice system.
Researchers hope their findings will contribute to ongoing discussions about reform by encouraging greater recognition of children’s experiences as evidence in their own right rather than information that must first be interpreted through adult perspectives.
A spokesperson from Manchester University told The Eye Of Media.Com: ‘The study presents a clear message that when children’s voices are overlooked, the consequences can extend far beyond individual court proceedings. They can shape mental health, physical well-being, education, relationships and trust in institutions for years to come. For researchers, ensuring that children are genuinely heard is not simply a matter of legal procedure—it is a public health imperative and a fundamental question of justice.
AD: Heritage And Restaurant Lounge Bar