Peter Davies, from NAAP, has written this in-depth article on the domestic abuse Bill – it’s relevance to Parental Alienation. And how we can all be misled…
In view of the horrible way countless vulnerable people were unscrupulously misled, it is essential that this article is shared as widely as possible.
First the bad news. On the face of it Philip Davies’ proposed amendments do not appear to have made it into the final cut. However, the devil lies in the detail. Therefore, we have done our research and homework to assess exactly what is happening with the Domestic Abuse Bill 2019-21 in relation to PA in particular. There are some pleasant surprises.
In this article we will outline what our research has disclosed. We have relied upon trustworthy primary sources throughout and we link to these trustworthy sites to empower readers and remove their dependence upon hoaxers, charlatans and purveyors of snake oil. Besides checking what we say you can use these sources in the future to check out any other parliamentary information, disseminated on-line, which looks dodgy, suspicious or just too good to be true.
OUR MUTUAL OBLIGATIONS
We regard the internet as a great privilege. Never before have we been blessed with access to such a wonderful platform to share information and never before has it been easier to check information. This is fine for those with critical faculties but since children’s critical faculties are a work in progress we monitor and regulate their internet access and even use protection software to ensure their online safety. One of the reasons parents and children become alienated is that they either have not developed critical faculties or they do not use them. For this reason, we are forever encouraging our members to ask lots of questions, to employ a healthy degree of scepticism and to evaluate all information critically. At a time when reliable information is so freely and easily available there are literally no excuses for being wrong footed by a scammer: particularly after you may have already been burned and should have learned from the first bitter experience.
Freedom of expression is NOT an absolute right. It comes with caveats and obligations. We all share a mutual obligation to ensure that what we say is correct and accurate. Everyone on social media now has an equal opportunity to be heard but that platform is not a license to spread rubbish across the land. It has never been easier to check facts therefore we owe it to ourselves and to others to treat each other with respect and to refrain from polluting the personal space of others with faecal matter. Integrity, honesty and self-respect are all equally as important. One person’s freedom and autonomy can often come at the expense of another person’s freedom and autonomy. Being protected from being force fed c**p is protecting my right to a peaceful and quiet life. In our view those that fail to respect the rights of others deserve to forfeit their own. This is especially true in relation to the thousands of vulnerable parents we help. We owe them a duty of care which involves doing the very best we can. Failing to check BEFORE posting falls a long way short of acceptable standards of professionalism and basic rigour. It is simply a lapse of integrity which is never acceptable.
Having said this, we are human and fallible. When we get it wrong we should accept responsibility, ’fess up’, admit our mistake and learn from it. Every alienated parent will have sad memories of someone they once loved who was never prepared to shoulder responsibility for their own behaviour. It is a repugnant trait which makes us wonder how these perpetrators manage to find someone to reproduce with in the first place. Sadly, the mask does not usually slip until you are on the hook and it’s too late.
RELIABLE SOURCES
The parliamentary library is always a great source of information for any current parliamentary business. This is where the MP’s go! The available briefing tells us that: ‘The Domestic Abuse Bill 2019-21 has completed its Committee stage and is due to have its Report stage and Third Reading on Monday 6 July 2020.’ Importantly it also gives valuable background: ‘The Domestic Abuse Bill 2019-21 was introduced to the House on 3 March 2020. Second Reading took place on 28 April 2020.
The Bill was considered by a Public Bill Committee over 12 sittings between 4 – 17 June 2020. The Committee took evidence from expert witnesses for the first two sittings. A range of external stakeholders submitted written evidence to the Committee.
The only significant amendment made during Committee Stage was the Government’s New Clause 16 (now clause 66 of the Bill) on homelessness. New Clause 16 was agreed without a vote. A number of minor and technical Government amendments were also agreed without a vote (these are not discussed in this paper).
There was only one division: on an Opposition amendment relating to the definition of “personally connected” in clause 2 of the Bill.’ ‘
Here is a link to the Parliamentary Library and a commentary about the Bill:
https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-br…/cbp-8959/…
THE GOOD NEWS
Secondly, here is the good news. S.76 of The Serious Crimes Act 2015 brought in the concept of needing to first be ‘personally connected’ in order for the offences of coercive control behaviour to be proven.
Here is a link:
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/9/section/…/enacted
This Act has often been criticised for having an ambit which is far too narrow. This effectively barred any prospect of prosecutions succeeding once couples were living apart and separated. The new 2020 Act is intended to broaden the definitions of ‘personally connected’ and now also includes those who ‘have been’ in the various categories of relationship previously stated. The ambit of the new bill has been expanded to include those who ‘have been’ living together but no longer do so.
The new bill reads as follows. (see pages 7 and 8). It is essential to read the ‘Domestic Abuse Bill 2020: overarching documents’ in conjunction with the new bill in order to gain insight into the trajectory which is being set with regard to PA behaviours.
Here is a link to the current draft of the 2020 Act:
https://publications.parliament.uk/…/c…/58-01/0141/20141.pdf
Here is a link to the overarching documents:
https://www.gov.uk/…/domestic-abuse-bill-2020-overarching-d…
THE DOMESTIC ABUSE ACT 2020
The parts of the draft act which are likely to be of most interest to us are:
Part 1: Section 1 (3) (c) & (e) and Section 1 (5)
Part 1: Section 2 (1) to 2 (3).
These are quoted below. Sections in italics have been italicised by us.
Domestic Abuse Act 2020
Part 1 Definition of “domestic abuse”
Section 1: Definition of “domestic abuse”
(1) This section defines “domestic abuse” for the purposes of this Act.
(2) Behaviour of a person (“A”) towards another person (“B”) is “domestic abuse” if—
(a) A and B are each aged 16 or over and are personally connected to each other,
and
(b) the behaviour is abusive.
(3) Behaviour is “abusive” if it consists of any of the following—
(a) physical or sexual abuse;
(b) violent or threatening behaviour;
(c) controlling or coercive behaviour;
(d) economic abuse (see subsection (4));
(e) psychological, emotional or other abuse;
and it does not matter whether the behaviour consists of a single incident or a course of conduct.
(4) “Economic abuse” means any behaviour that has a substantial adverse effect on B’s ability to—
(a) acquire, use or maintain money or other property, or
(b) obtain goods or services.
(5) For the purposes of this Act A’s behaviour may be behaviour “towards” B despite the fact that it consists of conduct directed at another person (for example, B’s child).
6) References in this Act to being abusive towards another person are to be read in accordance with this section.
(7) For the meaning of “personally connected”, see section 2.
Section 2: Definition of “personally connected”
Two people are “personally connected” to each other if any of the following applies—
(a) they are, or have been, married to each other;
(b) they are, or have been, civil partners of each other;
(c) they have agreed to marry one another (whether or not the agreement has been
terminated);
(d) they have entered into a civil partnership agreement (whether or not the
agreement has been terminated);
(e) they are, or have been, in an intimate personal relationship with each other;
(f) they each have, or there has been a time when they each have had, a parental
relationship in relation to the same child (see subsection (2));
(g) they are relatives.
(2) For the purposes of subsection (1)(f) a person has a parental relationship in relation to a child if—
(a) the person is a parent of the child, or
(b) the person has parental responsibility for the child.
(3) In this section—
“child” means a person under the age of 18 years;
“civil partnership agreement” has the meaning given by section 73 of the Civil
Partnership Act 2004;
“parental responsibility” has the same meaning as in the Children Act 1989; “relative” has the meaning given by section 63(1) of the Family Law Act 1996.
THE OVERARCHING DOCUMENTS
So far so good: these amendments are now making coercive control more relevant to PA cases because they are now enveloping former relationships as well as current relationships.
However, there is potentially even more in store. If we now turn to the explanatory notes for coercive and controlling behaviour on page 13 paras 44 to 49. This is where the real excitement begins.
Controlling or coercive behaviour
44. Section 76 of the Serious Crime Act 2015 introduced the offence of controlling or coercive behaviour in an intimate or family relationship to recognise that victims can experience extreme psychological and emotional abuse that can have severe impacts, whether or not accompanied by physical abuse. The offence is constituted by behaviour between current intimate partners, or between former intimate partners and family members who live together.
45.What constitutes controlling or coercive behaviour is outlined in guidance issued by the Government under section 77 of the Serious Crime Act 2015. Controlling or coercive forms part of the Government’s non-statutory definition of domestic violence and abuse and is described as:
• Controlling behaviour is: a range of acts designed to make a person subordinate and/or dependent by isolating them from sources of support, exploiting their resources and capacities for personal gain, depriving them of the means needed for independence, resistance and escape and regulating their everyday behaviour; and
Coercive behaviour is: an act or a pattern of acts of assault, threats, humiliation and intimidation or other abuse that is used to harm, punish, or frighten their victim.
46.Controlling or coercive behaviour also forms part of the definition of domestic abuse in section 1(3)(c) of the 2020 Act.
47.The statutory guidance framework issued under section 77 of the Serious Crime Act 2015 for the controlling or coercive behaviour offence can be found here.
48.Examples of controlling or coercive behaviour include:
• Controlling or monitoring the victim’s daily activities, including making them account for their time, dictating what they can wear, when they can eat;
• Isolating the victim from family and friends, intercepting messages or phone calls or refusing to interpret;
• Intentional undermining of the victim’s role as a partner, spouse or parent;
• Preventing the victim from taking medication or over-medicating them, or preventing the victim from accessing health or social care (especially relevant for victims with disabilities or long-term health conditions);
• Using substances to control a partner through dependency;
• Using children to control their partner, e.g. threatening to take the children away or manipulating professionals to increase the risk of children being removed into care;
Parental alienation, including preventing children from spending time with one parent or grandparents, from visiting friends’ houses and from participating in extracurricular activities;
• Threats to expose sensitive information (e.g. sexual activity) or make false allegations to family members, religious or local community including via photos or the internet;
• Preventing the victim from learning a language or making friends outside of their ethnic/ or cultural background;
• Threatening precarious immigration status against the victim, withholding documents, and giving false information to a victim about their visa or visa application;
• Threats of institutionalisation (particularly for disabled or elderly victims); and
Economic abuse (see paragraph 51).
49.As shown by the power and control wheel above, coercive or controlling behaviour is common in domestic abuse and can act as a driver for many of the other behaviours, as illustrated in the case study below.
Emotional or psychological abuse
50.Domestic abuse often involves emotional or psychological abuse. This can include:
• Manipulating a person’s anxieties or beliefs;
• Withholding affection;
• Turning children and friends against the victim (with a subsequent impact on children);
• Being stopped from seeing friends, relatives, or care workers;
• Being insulted, including in front of others. This includes insulting someone about their race, gender, sexual orientation, disability, faith, ability to parent and ability to work;
• Repeatedly being belittled;
• Keeping a victim awake/preventing them from sleeping;
• Using social media sites to intimidate the victim; and
Persuading a victim to doubt their own sanity or mind (including “gaslighting”).
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/…/Working_Together…
In short, under the bill, behaviours which could collectively be termed as parental alienation are now individually classed as emotionally abusive behaviour, controlling behaviour and coercive behaviour. Individual behaviours which would be considered as component behaviours to form an alienation diagnosis are individually classed as abusive and could warrant application of the punitive measures detailed in Part 3 of the new Act or a change of residence in their own right. Furthermore, Section 1 (3) assures parents, families courts and professionals that Behaviour is “abusive” if it consists of any of the following—
(a) physical or sexual abuse;
(b) violent or threatening behaviour;
(c) controlling or coercive behaviour;
(d) economic abuse (see subsection (4));
(e) Psychological, emotional or other abuse.
CONCLUSION
This will all take a little time to digest and we will need to study it thoroughly but in view of the absolute debacle of shoddily researched misinformation we have all been fed in the last few days we felt that it would be helpful to give readers the primary information in order to formulate their own opinions instead of relying upon untrustworthy and unreliable copy and pasters.
The bills and overarching documents square with and codify elements of the evolving caselaw. They appear to embody principles of landmark cases such as Re: L (A child) EWHC 867 (Fam) , which fell, ‘…short of attracting the labels “intractable hostility” or “parental alienation”.’ (para 1). In Re L the residence of a 9-year old boy was changed because he had suffered emotional harm. It was also recognised that the mother and grandmother’s lack of capacity to change risked worsening the harm already caused unless the boy’s residence was changed. It is notable that the court found the behaviour to be harmful below the threshold for psychological abuse set by the DSM. It also squares with the recent decision of the Court of Appeal in Re S (Parental Alienation: Cult) [2020] EWCA Civ 568 which focuses upon alienating behaviours as opposed to cumbersome and confusing umbrella labels.
It is important that we maintain a true and focussed aim on why we all work so hard to campaign for change. We are not interested in promoting a brand, promoting ourselves or obsessing about a concept for personal gain. We are interested in helping other parents and families recover their lost children back into their lives. We have managed that without this bill and the help it brings but it would have made our personal battles a lot easier if we had the support of the laws which this bill promotes.
By getting behind the bill and supporting it in its passage through Parliament during the months ahead we have the capacity and opportunity to make a huge and positive difference for our children and families. Having measures enshrined in laws, designed to protect children from non-accidental psychological injury and protect parents from coercive control and emotional abuse is something every human being should support without any reservations.
This article can also read on Linkedin. Emphasis we have added can be seen on this version.
#parentalalienation #abuse #domesticabuse #crime #families #protectmychild #familythugs
