Search

This thesis explores the experiences of female survivors of domestic abuse when an expert was instructed as part of their private law child arrangements proceedings in England and Wales. In 2020, 25 grand tour telephone interviews were conducted with survivors that provided an opportunity for them to describe their lived experiences of the expert process within the context of their own family court journey. The interviews were examined using discourse analysis and interpretations drew upon a feminist post-structuralist approach. Survivors' lived experiences indicated that there are inconsistencies in when an expert is instructed, who is subject to an assessment as well as the types of assessments chosen by the expert. However, a consensus of survivors described the process as uninformed, frightening, and coercive. Predominately, experts focused on changing survivors' normal responses to trauma rather than on the perpetrator's abusive behaviour. Consequently, survivors explained how, very often, the expert report made recommendations which were harmful to mothers and children that included, inappropriate psychological therapy, unsafe contact arrangements and the transfer of residence of children from a mother to a perpetrator. Survivors' lived experiences uniquely support the current belief that domestic abuse is usually not a barrier to contact and a contact at all costs ethos continues to prevail within the family court, which can be strengthened by expert instruction. This study concludes that there needs to be a better understanding of the role and impact of an expert within private law child arrangements proceedings, as well as a move toward domestic abuse experts rather than psychologists and psychiatrists.