By Lucy Caulkett-
LONDON — A scathing joint report published on January 21, 2026, by four major national inspectorates has warned that thousands of children across England and Wales are being systematically overlooked by frontline services, despite landmark laws designed to protect them as victims in their own right.
The thematic inspection, conducted by Ofsted, the Care Quality Commission (CQC), HM Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services (HMICFRS), and HM Inspectorate of Probation (HMIP), identified “widespread inconsistency” in how police, social workers, and health professionals support children in abusive households.
The disturbing report by Ofsted Inspectorate was highlighted to The Eye Of Media.Com on Friday evening, calling for urgent monitoring of developments in this area
AD: Capeesh Restaurant
The inspectorates visited six areas – Hertfordshire, Hillingdon, Norfolk, North Yorkshire, Reading and Redcar and Cleveland – from October 2024 to June 2025. They assessed, separately and collectively, the work of children’s social care, health, the police, youth justice services and schools, across four areas of practice responding to children who are victims of domestic abuse, at the point of identification; assessment, planning and decision making in response to notifications and referrals of child victim. protecting, supporting and caring for children who are at risk of being, or who have been, victims; preventing children from becoming victims. Inspectors tracked the experiences of 100s of children, examining 36 cases in detail, and also spoke to child victims of domestic abuse and their families.
The inspectorates worked with the Domestic Abuse Commissioner’s office to survey, and carry out focus groups with, survivors and parents from across the country, rather than just the inspected areas. The inspectorates visited six areas – Hertfordshire, Hillingdon, Norfolk, North Yorkshire, Reading and Redcar and Cleveland – from October 2024 to June 2025.
They assessed, separately and collectively, the work of children’s social care, health, the police, youth justice services and schools, across four areas of practice. Inspectors tracked the experiences of 100s of children, examining 36 cases in detail, and also spoke to child victims of domestic abuse and their families.
AD: Oysterian Sea Food Restaurant And Bar
Inspectors said they sampled and tracked the experiences of hundreds of children across these inspections, from which they selected a smaller sample of 36 children whose experiences we tracked in detail.
In order to assist the understanding of the multi-agency response to children who are at risk from, or are victims of, domestic abuse, and to help write the report, they also carried out a literature review of current research and held 2 focus groups for each . The inspectors further inspected with the multi-agency inspection teams that were involved in the inspections; when we could not hold a focus group with all necessary inspectors, we received written feedback. They also consulted stakeholders from organisations that work in the field of domestic abuse throughout the project, to help us develop the methodology and advise on our report.
The inspectorates said they found “too many” instances of children not being treated as domestic abuse victims, which was a “consistent finding” across most of the areas they visited.
They stated that children were sometimes seen as “passive witnesses”, “indirect victims” or “caught in the crossfire”, rather than directly experiencing harm. The findings were corroborated by parents responding to inspectorates’ survey, 8% of whom said their children were treated as victims in their own right.
The report also cited an expectation from agencies that non-abusing parents – mostly mothers – protect children from perpetrators over whom they had no control, with insufficient accountability placed on abusers. This finding was also reflected in focus groups, which highlighted that the risks to non-abusing parents, particularly the impact of coercive control, were not always assessed or understood. Where safety planning did support non-abusing parents, this was sometimes undermined by plans not being shared with other agencies, meaning practitioners were not aware of the actions needed to keep victims safe.
Failing to do meant there was “limited recognition of both the impact on the child and their current level of risk” and “delayed or inadequate support and protection”. For example, the report identified delays in holding strategy meetings when children may be facing significant harm.
Inspectors also found examples of assessments, planning and service delivery that were primarily focused on adults’ needs. For example, probation services often focused on adult victims and perpetrators and gave “insufficient attention to the risks posed to children”, the report said.
Other statements stated by the report includes: ‘Domestic abuse was not always identified or understood, including coercive control. When practitioners do not recognise or understand controlling or coercive behaviours, they do not always directly connect perpetrators’ behaviours with harm to children. A lack of effective identification of risk for children who are victims of domestic abuse meant that children did not always get the right help and protection at the right time. Early help for children at risk of domestic abuse was not consistently prioritised. Where there were services and responses in place, these made a significant difference.
‘We also saw a lack of focus on children’s needs for help and protection in some key multi-agency forums such as multi-agency risk assessment conferences (MARACs) and multi-agency public protection arrangements (MAPPA), as well as in some responses to individual children and their families. We saw some mitigation through other processes such as child protection planning, which had a greater focus on children.
‘Domestic abuse was not always identified or understood, including coercive control. When practitioners do not recognise or understand controlling or coercive behaviours, they do not always directly connect perpetrators’ behaviours with harm to children. A lack of effective identification of risk for children who are victims of domestic abuse meant that children did not always get the right help and protection at the right time. Early help for children at risk of domestic abuse was not consistently prioritised. Where there were services and responses in place, these made a significant difference.
‘We also saw a lack of focus on children’s needs for help and protection in some key multi-agency forums such as multi-agency risk assessment conferences (MARACs) and multi-agency public protection arrangements (MAPPA), as well as in some responses to individual children and their families. We saw some mitigation through other processes such as child protection planning, which had a greater focus on children.
‘Practice overall is too inconsistent. While we did see some excellent child-centred work that was based on developing strong relationships with families and led to children being safer, we also saw some poor practice. For example, some practitioners were over-optimistic and lacked the professional curiosity needed to better understand and recognise the impact of domestic abuse on children. When practitioners raised concerns about risks to children from domestic abuse and did not get the required response, they did not consistently challenge and escalate those concerns
Full Intent Of Law Not Served
Despite the Domestic Abuse Act 2021 recognizing children as victims if they are affected by domestic abuse, inspectors found the law’s full intent is not being realized. Yvette Stanley, Ofsted’s National Director for Children’s Social Care, stated it is “shocking that one in seven children in the UK will have lived with domestic abuse” and noted inconsistent improvements since the last review. The report indicates professional focus remains on adults, often failing to capture children’s experiences in risk assessments and referrals, leaving them without necessary support.
Key Findings from the 2026 Inspection.
Joint targeted area inspections (JTAIs) in six areas between October 2024 and June 2025 revealed critical issues. Safeguarding plans often relied too much on the non-abusing parent to protect the child from the perpetrator. Police and health services frequently failed to share detailed information about the child’s specific trauma.
The report specifically highlighted the vulnerability of unborn children and those aged 0 to 7, noting the potential for lifelong harm from early trauma.
A parallel report found that only one in five specialist children’s services have secure, long-term funding.
Recent data illustrates the scale of the problem. Statistics reveal that 3.8 million people aged 16 and over experienced domestic abuse in the year ending March 2025.
Domestic abuse is a factor in nearly one-third of “Child in Need” episodes in England. Over 105,000 children are estimated to live in households with “high-risk” domestic abuse.
Police referrals remain the most common entry point to social care, accounting for 28% of all referrals in 2025.
Commenting on the findings, Ofsted’s national director for children’s social care, Yvette Stanley,(pictured) said: “Although we saw some positive work to support children affected by domestic abuse, it is worrying that we did not find more consistent improvements since our last JTAI.”
”There must be a greater focus on recognising children as victims in their own right, and urgent improvements need to be made so that local agencies and partnerships can better support children affected by this type of abuse.”
Nicole Jacobs, the Domestic Abuse Commissioner, warned that neglecting child victims perpetuates the cycle of abuse. Children exposed to domestic violence face higher risks of:
The inspectorates called for “urgent improvements” for child-centered multi-agency responses. The government mentioned the upcoming Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill and Families First Partnership program as ways to improve information sharing and early help. The report concluded by emphasizing that children must be treated as primary victims, not just witnesses.
This publication will continue to assess the report and maintain surveillance of improvements being made to address them.
AD: Heritage And Restaurant Lounge Bar