Clean Slate Counselling

05/11/2026

03/11/2026

12/10/2026

Tracking technology is increasingly used to stalk, intimidate and harass.

Under proposed new NSW laws, secretly monitoring a partner’s movements would become a specific criminal offence.

NSW Partner Stalking Bill
👉Share this. Speaking up could change a life for the better.

• Emergency or crime in progress? Call Triple Zero (000)
• For non-urgent matters, call the Police Assistance Line on 131 444 or visit police.nsw.gov.au
• Have information about a crime? Contact nsw.crimestoppers.com.au or call 1800 333 000

Every piece of info helps keep our communities safe.

09/10/2026

https://www.facebook.com/share/v/1Dy9fYHKN7/?mibextid=wwXIfr

17/09/2026

This National Child Protection Week, the theme asks us to shift conversation to action. So we are naming where that action is most overdue: the family law system, where children are being removed from protective parents and placed with the person they fear.

Children who live with domestic, family and sexual violence are victim-survivors in their own right. Not bystanders. Not background noise in someone else's case. Their safety, their voices and their disclosures matter, and they deserve to be believed.

Yet a federal inquiry heard this month that mothers who disclose domestic violence and child abuse are losing their children at an alarming rate, and being misidentified as perpetrators in a system described as inhumane. The inquiry heard something that should alarm all of us: lawyers are advising victim-survivors not to raise abuse at all, because disclosing it goes so badly for them in the family court. Sit with what that means. The safest legal strategy has become silence, and mothers are being counselled to hide the very violence their children need protection from, because naming it can cost them their children. An analysis of 20 Magellan List cases, the most serious abuse matters the courts handle, found that in 70 per cent, a parent who had disclosed using violence was granted sole parental responsibility. The inquiry also heard about "cold swaps": a child taken from a protective mother and handed to a father against whom violence had been disclosed. Mothers marched out by security guards. No chance to say goodbye. No chance to explain.

The reports that shape these outcomes are written by family report writers, and a single writer's opinion can set the tone for the entire case. The courts' own Standards of Practice say these writers should have training in family violence and abuse. But "should" is the operative word. Those Standards are guidelines, not binding, with no mechanism to enforce them, and family report writers are not required to hold clinical experience at all. In 2024 to 2025, in applications for final parenting orders, one or more parties alleged family violence in 86 per cent of matters, and alleged a child had been abused or was at risk in 77 per cent. The competencies these report writers are not required to hold are the very ones nearly every case in front of them demands.

And there is no shared standard for who writes them. A family report is not binding, and a judge can reject it. But in practice these reports are often highly influential, and where two parents tell opposing stories, the report writer's assessment can be what tips the balance. Yet the people preparing them have vastly different training and expertise. Some are psychiatrists or psychologists, registered with Ahpra and answerable to a professional body. Others are not registered with any regulator at all. This is not about which professions are trusted to do this work. It is that a role this powerful has no common standard, no mandatory accreditation, and no requirement for specialist family violence and child abuse expertise, so the same life-changing report can come from someone highly qualified or from someone with no specialist training in family violence or child abuse at all.

A family report writer does not make the final order. But their opinion can shape it, and a judge often has little else to rely on. People whose reports carry that much influence over where a child lives, and over whether a child's disclosure of abuse is believed, should be held to the highest standards: registered, accountable, and expert in the family violence that sits at the centre of nearly every case they assess. Right now, nothing requires it.

None of this is new. The Australian Law Reform Commission recommended a mandatory national accreditation scheme for these practitioners in 2019. A parliamentary committee recommended the same, with a complaints mechanism, in 2021. When the government consulted, more than 90 per cent of stakeholders backed reform. Parliament then passed a law in 2023 giving itself the power to set enforceable standards for the people who write these reports. That power commenced in 2024. The standards still do not exist. Seven years of recommendations, consultations and promises, and not one enforceable standard to show for it. How many more women and children's lives need to be destroyed before the government acts.

When a child's disclosure is set aside, when a protective parent's fear is reframed as obstruction, and when "alienation," which the UN Special Rapporteur on violence against women and girls has described as a discredited, unscientific pseudo-concept used to dismiss abuse allegations, is allowed to drown out a documented history of abuse, the system is failing the very children it exists to protect. Courts have ordered police to enforce these handovers, removing frightened children by force.

This is not only about where a child lives. Courts have made orders forbidding a child from seeing a psychologist, forbidding a child from attending church, even barring a mother from seeing her own GP or her own psychologist. Protective mothers are being treated not the same as criminals, but worse.

Our Chair, psychiatrist Dr Karen Williams, puts it plainly:

"A person accused of a serious crime is presumed innocent, has the evidence tested to a criminal standard, and can appeal if it goes wrong. Even a parent convicted and imprisoned is often still supported to maintain contact with their children through visitation. Yet a woman in the family court can be told she is never to see her children again, without ever being charged, without a conviction, and with almost no prospect of reversing the decision. No one is looking at the impact on these children who are torn from their protective parents. The court makes these orders, and there is no follow-up to check whether they are even working. The closed nature of the court allows this to go on without scrutiny."

We know how this ends, because we see it in our consulting rooms. A mother who did everything she was told to do. She disclosed the abuse. She protected her children. She trusted the process. And a child who spoke up, who told someone what was happening, was not believed. The court handed those children to the perpetrator anyway.

Dr Williams does not soften her conclusion, and nor will we. In her words, "this system is destructive, and in my opinion, beyond repair." What is happening to these children is a violation of their most basic rights, and it is being done in the name of protecting them. It is time this system was opened up, held to account, and rebuilt around the safety of children.

Read the inquiry coverage: https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/9343290/children-handed-to-abusers-in-inhumane-family-courts/

With thanks to the survivor advocates and Family Court Accountability Network /FCAN raising this before the inquiry.

If you or someone you know is affected, support is available.

1800RESPECT: 1800 737 732 (24hr)
DVConnect: 1800 811 811 (24hr)
Full Stop Australia: 1800 424 017 (24hr)
Rainbow DV Helpline (LGBTQIA+): 1800 497 212 (24hr)
13YARN: 13 92 76 (24hr, First Nations)
MensLine Australia: 1300 789 978 (24hr)
Lifeline: 13 11 14 (24hr)
Emergency: 000

17/09/2026

Perpetrators of domestic violence would be punished rather than rewarded for their actions when committing abuse against their former partners through the tax and super systems.

22/07/2026

https://www.facebook.com/share/p/14cDmv2e3cp/?mibextid=wwXIfr

Content warning: family court, removal of children, child sexual abuse, domestic and family violence, trauma.

Our doctors sit with women and children who are trapped in the family court system. What they describe is not justice. It is a second site of harm.

They describe paying hundreds of dollars an hour to see their own children under supervision. Selling everything and losing their home to keep fighting. Losing income because the system demands so much of their time and mental capacity that maintaining work becomes impossible. Being on the verge of homelessness, or moving back in with their parents because they have nothing left. Having their counselling records subpoenaed. Seeking help for their trauma, only to have that help-seeking turned into evidence of their instability. And being unable to speak publicly at all, because anything a mother puts on the record can be used to argue she is unfit.

Doctors Against Violence Towards Women exists because we see the impacts of violence and the system failures that compound it, and we are committed to using our voice to help effect change.

Recently, ABC News reported on a mother who disclosed serious domestic violence, was labelled a "difficult witness," and lost custody of the children she had raised since birth. The children's father had lived overseas, missing the first 20 months of his son's life. His daughter, born after proceedings began, had met him once. Both children are neurodivergent and need additional support. Her children were four and seven. The court gave their mother just over four hours to hand them over and forbade her from seeing them again until they turned 18. Child services itself found the father "may struggle with managing parenting," specifically because he had no relationship with his daughter and his son had high needs. She woke crying for her mother for weeks. It took 10 months of both parents working together to have the orders withdrawn. The father himself said the judgment was wrong and returned them.

This is one example of a pattern of systemic failure and systems abuse in the family court that is having catastrophic impacts on women and children, and despite growing awareness, these injustices are still occurring. Women are told not to report abuse because it will jeopardise their case. Children who disclose their father's abuse are routinely disbelieved and told they have been influenced by their mothers. Mothers are blamed when their children do not want to see their father and labelled mentally ill or "alienators." Safe parents exhibiting protective behaviour are being punished. Judges are ordering children not to see their mothers, not to see their therapists, and to live with someone they are afraid of.

A 2021 analysis of 521 Family Court judgments found that in fully contested cases involving child sexual abuse allegations, judicial officers expressed belief the allegations were true in just 14 per cent of cases. Researchers working with the National Centre for Action on Child Sexual Abuse describe this as the reverse of what the evidence tells us about disclosure. The research confirms what our doctors are hearing in their consulting rooms.

Read the ABC's full report: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-07-17/alleged-dv-victim-loses-custody-of-children-in-family-court/106826526

Here is what we know clinically. Follow the trauma from the beginning. First there is the violence itself, years of living in fear inside your own home, surviving a perpetrator while protecting your children. Then there is leaving, which we know is one of the most dangerous times. But for women with children, leaving does not mean it is over. The family court system requires them to remain entangled with their perpetrator for years. At a time when she needs to focus on recovery and finding safety, the system places her in years of litigation, cross-examination about the worst moments of her life, and the constant threat of losing her children. That would dysregulate anyone. No mother strapping her children into a police car is going to present as calm and coherent. Trauma changes how people present. A victim-survivor who is fragmented, distressed, or "difficult" in the witness box is showing the neurobiology of everything that has been done to her, not unreliability.

Composure is not credibility.

This is the cruelest loop in the system: the perpetrator traumatises her, the court process traumatises her again, and then the court reads her trauma as evidence against her. The more she has survived, the less credible she appears.

And when the orders come down, the trauma does not stop with her. It passes to her children. Abruptly severing a child's primary attachment relationship is not a neutral administrative outcome. It is a clinically recognised harm. This is a system that retraumatises a mother, then goes on to traumatise her children. The very children it exists to protect.

If you are living this right now, we see you. You are not alone. The exhaustion, the fear of your own words, the feeling that telling the truth could or has made everything worse, these are experiences shared by thousands of women across this country. The system is failing you. You are not failing your children.

The national policy response is not keeping up. Legislative reforms have been made. The court has introduced risk screening and specialist lists. But the numbers are moving in the wrong direction: the proportion of parenting cases involving allegations of family violence has risen from 80 to 86 per cent in four years, cases involving allegations of child abuse have risen from 70 to 77 per cent, and cases alleging four or more risk factors have increased from 66 to 73 per cent.

The Australian Government's Second Action Plan on domestic, family and sexual violence, the plan that will shape the next five years of national policy, proposes five priority areas. The family law system appears only in passing. The consultation paper classifies family law services as part of a "non-specialist workforce" that "may come into contact with victim-survivors," as though the court that determines where children live and who they live with is peripheral to their experience of violence. There is no dedicated analysis of the family court as a site of harm and no commitments to examine, fund, or strengthen how the family law system responds to domestic and family violence.

How can a national plan that claims to deliver a whole-of-system response to ending violence against women and children dedicate pages to online platforms, workplaces, schools and dating apps, but fail to substantively address the family court? This is a system that is retraumatising victim-survivors and forcing women to remain entangled with their perpetrators for years. It is removing children from protective parents. And in cases where the evidence of who is causing harm is overwhelming, it is awarding custody to the parent perpetrating the violence, inflicting harm and trauma on the very women and children the plan exists to protect.

Without the family court, this plan is incomplete.

Women and children are paying the price. It is time to act.

Sources: Webb, Moloney, Smyth & Murphy, 'Allegations of child sexual abuse: An empirical analysis of published judgements from the Family Court of Australia 2012-2019,' Australian Journal of Social Issues, 2021. ABC Specialist Reporting Team, July 2026. DFSV Commission Yearly Report to Parliament, 2025 (Recommendation 27). ANROWS Second Action Plan Consultation Paper, May 2026. National Legal Aid, FCFCOA parenting case data, May 2026.

If this post raises anything for you, support is available:
1800RESPECT: 1800 737 732
DVConnect: 1800 811 811
Full Stop Australia: 1800 424 017
Rainbow DV Helpline: 1800 497 212
13YARN: 13 92 76
MensLine Australia: 1300 789 978
In an emergency, call 000