Domestic violence does not only affect the health and well being of abused women but it also affects any children that may live with her. Children may be either being directly abused by the perpetrator of the domestic violence (research shows this happens in up to 60% of cases) and/or be affected by witnessing domestic violence. In 90% of incidents children are either in the same room or the next room during an assault on their mother (Hughes 1992). 73% of children directly witness the violent assaults on their mothers, including 10% whose mothers are sexually abused (NCH Action for Children study done by Abrahams 1994).
Children often risk assault themselves by intervening to protect their mother, either directly by trying to physically stop the violence or indirectly by seeking help, such as contacting the police, a relative or friend. Some children may feel so concerned for their mother’s safety that they may want to protect her all the time. In such cases children might refuse to go to school or feign illness so that they can stay at home with their mother (Jaffe, Wolfe and Wilson 1990).

Children are often encouraged to support or participate in the abuse and degradation of their mother or are abused themselves by the perpetrator of the violence.

Children are also sometimes used as a weapon, both literally and metaphorically, by the perpetrators of domestic violence, who may threaten to harm or abduct children to prevent the woman from leaving the home.

Children’s responses to living with domestic violence vary enormously but can include the following:

• Many live in a constant state of fear, anxiety, confusion and often helplessness - never feeling safe.
  
  
• Internalised distress, such as depression, anxiety, withdrawal, eating problems and self-harm. (Mental health problems, which develop as a result of domestic violence, cannot be properly addressed without attention to the domestic violence.)
  
  
• Externalised distress, such as heightened aggression, anger, hyperactivity and behavioural problems.
  
  
• Stress indicators, such as sleeping difficulties (including insomnia, nightmares and being fearful of going to bed), bed-wetting, difficulties with concentration, disrupted or shortened attention span.
  
  
• Stress-related illnesses, such as asthma, diarrhoea, stomach aches, headaches and bronchitis.
  
  
• Maladaption.
  
  
• Low self-esteem.
  
  
• Social isolation and poor social skills or alternatively highly developed social skills and the ability to negotiate difficult situations.
  
  
• Difficulties with trusting others.
  
  
• Feeling responsible, guilty and to blame.
  
  
• Secretive, silent and unable to tell.
  
  
• Developmental delays in young children.
  
  
• Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD).
  
  
• Difficulties at school, including low educational achievement, truanting, poor performance and lack of concentration. Conversely, school may be the only safe place for them, so children may do well at school academically, but seem reluctant to go home at the end of the day.
  
  
• Running away from home: studies of young homeless people suggest that running away from home is often to escape the domestic violence and abuse they are experiencing and/or witnessing there.
  
  
• They become ‘parental children’: taking on responsibilities in the home, such as child care for younger siblings and household chores. They will provide support for other members of the family after a violent episode and/or they might try to placate their fathers. This assumption of adult responsibilities may become burdensome and may prevent children asking their mother for help.
  
  
• Living in temporary accommodation also has adverse effects on children. These effects range from poor health and behaviour problems to low educational attainment.
  
  
• They may experience grief caused by the losses involved in moving home, changing school and the loss of possessions, pets and friends.
  
  
• The evidence points to the possibility that the cumulative harm from witnessing domestic violence will affect the child’s emotional and mental health in future relationships. (Brandon & Lewis 1996: 41)
  
  
• Adolescents may attempt to gain relief through drugs, alcohol, early marriage or pregnancy (Sinclair 1985) or they might become involved in criminal activity (Jaffe, Wolfe and Wilson 1990). Adolescents living with domestic violence are more likely to be subjected to bullying at school by others.
  
  
• Both male and female college-age adults from violent homes exhibit higher levels of aggression and anxiety, although more depression has been noted amongst females.
  
  
• Violence during pregnancy can result in physical and learning disabilities in children.
  
  
• Emotional confusion in relation to parents.
  
  
• Some children decide that their optimum chance of survival might lie in siding with the father, including sometimes joining in with the abuse of the mother.

All the research evidence so far demonstrates that children are direct victims of domestic violence, whether or not they are being assaulted themselves. Even very young children and babies according to the latest research are aware of violence occurring around them and can be adversely affected, though they cannot necessarily make sense of it at the time.

While women frequently try to shield their children from the extent of the abuse they are experiencing to protect their safety and well being, research shows that children are often close by and aware that their mother is being abused. It may also be less frightening to be able to talk about what they know is going on than try to keep it a secret. Women should, therefore, be advised to be honest with their children provided it is safe to do so, and encourage their children to talk and ask questions about what is happening. Women should be prepared to answer queries truthfully and sensitively as much as they can, depending on the age of the child and their level of understanding. It is also important to tell children what they want to know, rather than what it is thought they should know.

[Wife] battering is the most common context for child abuse [and] the battering male is the typical child abuser. (Stark & Flitcraft 1988)

Research shows that up to 60% of child protection cases also involve domestic violence. The presence of domestic violence might be an indicator of child abuse, e.g. Edleson (1995) in his study found that 32% to 53% of all families where women were being physically beaten by their partners, the children were also the victims of direct abuse by the same perpetrator. It is vital, therefore, that agencies actively check the welfare of the child(ren) where domestic violence is found to be an issue. Likewise in child protection cases it is vital that domestic violence is looked for and where it is present, it must be dealt with; as this is a vital way of protecting not just the mother, but the child as well, from further abuse. To minimise the significance of domestic violence in child protection is to risk adopting both ineffective and potentially dangerous practices. There is an urgent need to overcome the historical demarcation between services for women and those for children, as the protection of women & children is inextricably linked.

A particularly interesting study is that of Hester & Pearson (1998) of NSPCC case files, which revealed that in at least a third of cases accepted for service, domestic violence was an issue, but once a more detailed focus on domestic violence was carried out this rose to 62%. This research highlights the importance of professionals actively looking for domestic violence in their work.

Many of the underlying issues are the same or overlap in both child abuse and domestic violence, as they both involve one person exerting power and control over another. (Hester & Pearson’s 1998 study of NSPCC practice.)

The Social Service Inspectorate report on Domestic Violence and Social Care points out, "Protection and empowerment of non-abusing women is effective child protection".

A study by Bowker, Arbitell and McFerron (1988) found that the more frequent the violence to wives, including physical violence and marital rape, the more extreme the physical abuse of the children. The authors concluded that:

"the severity of the wife beating is predictive of the severity of the child abuse".

Domestic violence can be seen as a factor in the continuation of child abuse, as the existence of other forms of violence and the victimisation of others by violence, will present a major obstacle to the disclosure by the child of abuse. Many children living with domestic violence learn from an early age that the violence must be kept secret at all costs. The children believe that by keeping their own abuse secret they are protecting themselves and their mothers.

Children will often keep the domestic violence secret because:

• They have been told to.
  
  
• They are being protective of their mother, not wanting to add to their mother’s distress, etc.
  
  
• They are protecting the abusing parent/parent figure.
  
  
• They are extremely fearful of the consequences of sharing the family ‘secret’ with anyone — this may include fears of further violence to their mothers and/or themselves. Many abusers threaten terrible consequences if the domestic violence becomes known to others.

Evidence from child death inquiries highlights that we ignore the issue of domestic violence at children’s peril.

The psychological impact of domestic violence on women has been found to have parallels with the impact of torture and imprisonment on hostages. Further, in Maynard’s (1985) examination of social work case files all the women who were experiencing domestic violence were referred to as lethargic and lacking in energy. Thus for some women the physical and emotional effects of domestic violence can have a detrimental impact on their parenting abilities and their relationship with their children. However with proper support to live free from domestic violence, such women can normally develop good parenting.

The effects of domestic violence on parenting can include:

• Inconsistent parenting.
  
  
• Prevents women offering normal standards of care.
  
  
• Women living with domestic violence often have a perception of child care as more stressful than women not experiencing violence (Holden & Ritchie 1991).
  
  
• Women may lose their self-confidence as mothers.
  
  
• Women may be emotionally drained with little to give to their children.
  
  
• Women may experience an emotional distance between themselves and their children. This can all be compounded by the difficult behaviour of the children, as the children too are trying to come to terms with the violence they are witnessing and experiencing (NCH Study Abrahams 1994).
  
  
• Violence against children from mothers can at times be understood as a means of protecting the children from harsher treatment from their male partners and/or because of their own sense of frustration or distress (Kelly 1996).
  
  
• Some children might also have to deal with the confusing situation of their mothers being stricter and less affectionate in the presence of their violent partners. This might be compounded by the father’s negative and strict involvement with the children (Holden & Ritchie 1991).

These issues can be compounded if:

• The child was conceived through rape.
  
  
• Domestic violence began or increased in severity during pregnancy.
  
  
• The man keeps the woman in a constant state of child rearing as a means of control.
  
  
• Through oppression, children side with the man.
  
  
• Children join in the abuse and/or replicate the man’s behaviour.

It is vital that women are given time and space to explore these issues.

The domestic violence experienced by mothers can reduce their awareness of what else is happening around them. In a study of the mothers of daughters who had been abused by their fathers, it was found that mothers were rendered unaware or incapable of discovering the abuse to their children, partly as a result of the violence they were experiencing from their partners (Tyler Johnson 1992).

Hooper (1995) similarly described women as being so pre-occupied with their own daily survival that this restricted their awareness of what was happening to their children.

When women contact social services in order to obtain help with the protection of their children, they may not disclose the domestic violence for fear that their children may be taken away, but rather they will say that they are "unable to cope", which may lead to them being seen as inadequate mothers.

The research of Holden & Ritchie (America 1991) found that the perpetrators of violence had inferior parenting skills including being:

• More irritable.
  
  
• Less involved in child rearing.
  
  
• Less physically affectionate.
  
  
• Using more negative control techniques, such as physical punishment.

Yet Hester & Radford (1996) found that professionals are often very optimistic about men’s parenting skills, whilst scrutinising women’s parenting in much greater detail.

Women generally want their children to have contact with their fathers and only try to prevent such contact when they feel certain that it will be detrimental to their children. Yet when mothers try to protect their children from abusive fathers, they are often viewed by the courts and welfare professionals not as protective, but as obstructive, manipulative and irrationally ‘implacably hostile’. Some women have preferred to face imprisonment for contempt of court, rather than allow contact to take place, but still these women have not been listened to. When mother’s have complied with contact orders, against their better judgment, and abuse has occurred, this has led to problems in the relationship between the mother and her children, as the children perceive that their mother is "sending" them to be abused and the children are angry that she does not protect them.

Abusive men often use contact as a means to continue to control and abuse the woman and/or children. One research study (Kelly) showed that 95% of the women studied were assaulted or further abused during child contact negotiations and arrangements after separation. This continued violence and abuse will often even continue after the family has been rehoused. (Malos & Hague 1993)

Hester & Radford’s (1996) study of contact in circumstances where there was a history of domestic violence showed that 40% of the women interviewed reported that their children had been physically or sexually abused by fathers during contact arrangements. Children are also murdered by fathers on contact visits.

Much research shows that abusive behaviour often escalates over time and, in particular, escalates when women attempt to leave or in other ways assert their individuality and strength. The most dangerous time for women and children is when the woman has taken steps to separate.

The Children Act 1989 covers both public law (child protection) and private law (arrangements after relationship breakdown). When making decisions in relation to the welfare of children, the court and child welfare professionals must have regard to two central features of the Children Act: the ‘welfare checklist’ and the concept of ‘parental responsibility’. However, the lack of recognition within the Children Act 1989 in general, and within the welfare checklist in particular, of the risks and practical problems faced by women and children experiencing domestic violence in making safe arrangements after relationship breakdown, can sometimes cause problems and has only recently been acknowledged as an issue.

The court has to take into consideration the following factors in every case involving a child’s upbringing where the making, variation or discharge of any order is opposed by any party, and in every case where the child may be at risk of harm. This applies both to orders in family proceedings under Section 8 and to applications by local authorities relating to care and supervision under Part IV.

1. The ascertainable wishes and feelings of the child concerned (considered in light of his/her age and understanding).
   
   
2. His/her physical, emotional and educational needs.
   
   
3. The likely effect on him/her of any change in his circumstances. (Note: change is usually regarded as disruptive — all things being equal, judges will usually rule in favour of the parent that currently has residence — this is one reason why its so important that women take their children with them if they leave.)
   
   
4. His/her age, sex, background and any characteristics of him/her that the court considers relevant.
   
   
5. Any harm which he/she has suffered or is at risk of suffering.
   
   
6. How capable his/her parents, and any other person in relation to whom the court considers the question to be relevant, are of meeting his/her needs.
   
   
7. The range of proceedings available to the court under this Act in the proceedings in question.

From the perspective of those experiencing domestic violence, the implementation of the welfare checklist can be problematic in practice. For example, there is no formal requirement on the court to consider the effects of the decisions made under the Children Act 1989 on the safety of an adult (usually the woman) who may be at risk.

‘Parental responsibility’ is defined in the Act as:

"all the rights, duties, powers, responsibilities and authority which by law a parent of a child has in relation to the child and his property." [Children Act 1989, s.3 (1)]

and is awarded according to birth status and residence arrangements.

Who has parental responsibility?

• The natural mother automatically has it and doesn’t lose it until child reaches 16.
  
  
• The natural father has it, if he was married to the mother at the time of the child’s birth or if he marries her subsequently.
  
  
• If he and mother make a parental responsibility agreement, or
  
  
• If he applies to the court and the court grants permission.
  
  
• Anyone with a residence order in respect of a particular child has it, for as long as that residence order lasts, unless they are a biological parent of the child, in which case they keep it even after the order ends.
  
  
• The local authority has it when a care order is in force, but they share this with the natural parents.

Once parental responsibility has been given to a natural father (if he is not automatically entitled through marriage), he cannot have it removed from him even if the child does not live with him. The natural father has precedence over others in relation to guardianship of children after the death of the natural mother; however, if there is a residence order in force in someone else’s name when the mother dies, that person may be granted parental responsibility.

Even though the parents are not married, the father still has a financial obligation to the child. In a case where the man is not the father of a child but has been cohabiting with the mother and treated her children as a child of the family, he may still be liable for financial provision.

If married, both husband and wife have parental responsibility for their children. However, if they should divorce or separate, the court has a right to make a Residence Order to determine with whom the children will live. The court can also make a Contact Order stating that children should see the other parent at certain specified times.

If not married to the father of the child, the woman has sole parental responsibility. The father of the child(ren) can apply for a residence or contact order and for parental responsibility. This can be granted if the court considers that it will be in the interests of the child(ren).

Under Section 47 of the Children Act 1989, local authorities have a duty to take steps to safeguard the welfar of any child suffering or likely to suffer ‘significant harm’. Until very recently, however, there was little recognition by child welfare professionals (except those working in refuges) of the links between domestic violence and child abuse. Recent research has shown that the worst child protection outcomes (child death) are where domestic violence to women is ignored in child protection strategies. It is now clear that giving support to the non-abusing parent and protecting her from domestic violence is likely to be the best way to protect the child. In the past, however, removing the child was a common solution. Therefore, abused women, and in particular some women that are alcohol or drug dependant or mentally ill (which may be as a result of violence) may be unwilling to approach the police or social services for fear of losing their children.

Advice workers should be able to assess women thoroughly in order to give appropriate advice, support and make referrals to specialised domestic violence agencies. Women should be advised that social services are not there to take their children away, unless there is no other way of insuring the children’s protection and welfare. If a woman complains of, or suspects, violence towards her children, she should be taken seriously and should be encouraged to do something about it. Professionals must follow child protection procedures where child abuse is suspected.

Under the Family Law Act 1996, an amendment has been made to Section 38 and Section 44 of the Children Act 1989, so that the courts now have powers to exclude someone from the home who is suspected of abusing a child within the home, where an emergency protection order or interim care order has been applied for or is in place. Guidance has been given by the Department of Health on the implementation of this new power to support the protection of children as well as women at risk from domestic violence.

Under Section 17.1(a) of the Children Act 1989, local authorities have a duty to ‘safeguard and promote the welfare of children within their area who are in need’, and can provide a range of services both directly to children (for example support for children’s workers in refuges) and to help enable the non-abusing parent to protect her children.

Under Section 8 of the Children Act 1989 the court may make four types of orders within family proceedings in respect of the child’s welfare: contact orders, residence orders, prohibited steps orders and/or specific issue orders.

• Contact orders: require the person with whom a child lives, or is to live, to allow the child to visit, stay or have contact with the person named in the order. The courts are encouraged to view contact with a child as the right of the child rather than the right of the parent. Contact may be direct, e.g. face to face, or indirect, e.g. by telephone or letter. Contact may range from long or short visits and it can be supervised or unsupervised. If a woman fears violence she can ask for contact to be supervised. In certain cases the court will refuse to allow contact or will order that contact be supervised or take place on neutral ground or at one of the special contact centres.
  
  
• Residence orders: determine where and with whom the child is to live. It can be made in favour of more than one person, even if both parties do not live together. If the order is in favour of one parent it does not take away parental responsibility from the other parent. Where a residence order is in force no person may cause the child to be known by a new surname or remove the child from the United Kingdom without the consent of every person who has parental responsibility.
  
  
• Prohibited steps orders: prohibit a person with parental responsibility from taking any steps contained in the order without the consent of the court.
  
  
• Specific issue orders: give direction regarding a specific question in relation to any aspect of parental responsibility for a child.
  
  

A welfare report is often of vital importance in the court’s decision-making in relation to the welfare of a child. Whilst these are normally prepared by Court Welfare Officers, the court can ask a social worker or other officer of the local authority to provide one. The National Standards (1994) for probation service family court welfare work state clearly that where there is domestic violence, the preparation of such reports should not require women to attend joint interviews with their abusers. Similar practices have been adopted by some local authority social services departments where they have developed domestic violence policies.

The combination of the Children Act 1989’s silence on domestic violence-related issues and the lack of awareness among many involved in implementing the Act has produced many situations in which children and women have been left at continued risk of violence and abuse. Growing awareness of these problems by the Department of Health has identified the need for more training and guidance for practitioners to ensure that they support the non-abusing parent to protect her child.