When mothers go to court to seek justice and protection from their violent ex-partner, they often do not receive any help, but rather experience victim-blaming and a perpetrator-victim reversal. This not only destroys their faith in the justice system, but also leaves them with a profound feeling of despair and helplessness. The approach of many family courts is not only devastating for mothers, they are dangerous for our society as a whole because they perpetuate misogynistic myths!”
Andrea Czak from the Feminist Single Parents Association – FEM.A
Vienna (OTS) – Some mothers experience years of ordeal before they can free themselves from a violent relationship. Many of them experience violence again in court: they are not believed. You are forced into parental counseling with your violent ex-partner. If the mothers protect their children and the guardianship process takes a long time, the separation is described as “highly contentious”. This is often a euphemism for institutional violence.
Most pregnancies are accompanied by the hope of a harmonious family life. But what if a partner turns out to be toxic? Mothers in violent relationships find it difficult to separate because of their financial dependence through motherhood: they cannot afford expensive divorce proceedings. When they decide to separate after years of psychological or even physical violence, many mothers experience institutional violence in family courts.
Toxic fathers who do not want to accept the loss of control over their ex-partner and their children use post-separation violence with the help of the judiciary to maintain their power. To do this, they use legal means that they misuse and bring numerous, disproportionate lawsuits. In guardianship proceedings, for example, they make demands that cannot be met, are unwilling to compromise and continually make new submissions to the court. They take any proceedings that have not been decided to their satisfaction to the next instance or begin further proceedings, for example applications for a reduction in maintenance, contact legal proceedings, defamation suits, etc.
The term “highly contentious” is usually a perpetrator-victim reversal: the flood of lawsuits is violence!
Mothers, on the other hand, are faced with the icy wind of patriarchy in many family courts: the violence of children’s fathers is denied or trivialized by many judges. Women who want to protect their children by all means are classified as troublemakers, manipulators or liars and are encouraged to “look forward”. After all, the violence was already in the past, even if it only happened recently. Separations involving lengthy proceedings are classified by courts as “highly contentious”. Officially, high contention is defined as “the failed attempt by parents to resolve child-related conflicts after separation or divorce through extrajudicial and judicial interventions.” A possible power imbalance, (financial) dependencies and psychiatric problems of a parent are completely ignored.
Instead of support and justice, mothers affected by violence often experience institutional violence in foster care proceedings. Not only are they not believed, the court often forces them to attend parental counseling with their ex-partner. Parental counseling represents a new stage for toxic fathers on which they can continue to exert (psychological) violence on the mother. Anti-violence training for men, however, is rarely prescribed. In addition, the mothers usually have to bear half of the expensive costs for parental advice, legal representation and family court reports. Toxic fathers of children use these legal remedies with calculation: financially strong fathers with narcissistic traits try to drive the ex-partner into financial ruin until she cannot raise any further funds for legal representation.
Andrea Czak from the Feminist Single Parents Association – FEM.A reports:
“When mothers seek justice and protection from a violent ex-partner in court, they often do not receive any help, but rather experience victim-blaming and a perpetrator-victim reversal. This not only destroys their faith in the justice system, but also leaves them with a profound feeling of despair and helplessness. The approach of many family courts is not only devastating for mothers, they are dangerous for our society as a whole because they perpetuate misogynistic myths!”
Mothers with toxic ex-partners need to be better protected from intimidation lawsuits
The European Council has also recognized that the misuse of legal remedies is a form of intimidation and violence: against lawsuits intended to intimidate and silence journalists and human rights defenders (“SLAPP” lawsuits) there is a package of measures. Women who have been victims of partner violence, on the other hand, have to face these intimidation claims alone. The protection of the European Council does not apply to them.
There is an urgent need for a paradigm shift in Austrian society, in the media and in family courts. The perception that “highly contentious” separations are based on ex-partners’ quarrelsomeness goes back to misogynistic and patriarchal myths. Today, no one would call bullying a “quarrel.” It is time for mothers who have been bombarded with lawsuits by toxic fathers for years to be recognized not as “arguments” but as victims of post-separation violence and institutional violence. The perpetrator-victim reversal must end. There is an urgent need for a data-supported, serious discourse about the causes of years-long procedures!
FEM.A demands:
- The official definition of contentiousness and highly contentiousness must take into account the power positions and dependencies of the ex-partners on each other. If there is an imbalance of power and (financial) dependence of the mother on the father, there can be no high contention – that is violence!
- If there are frequent complaints from the children’s fathers, a specialist psychiatric report must be ordered by the court. Before classifying it as “highly controversial”, psychiatric illnesses must be ruled out!
- If violence, including psychological violence, has occurred, or if there is a power imbalance between father and mother, mandatory parental counseling should not be required. Coercive agreement is institutional violence!
- Family court reports commissioned by judges must be free of charge for those affected! Parents are currently being forced to share the costs of several thousand euros equally. This is institutional, financial violence!
- Family court reports may only be carried out by experts who are demonstrably specialized in partner violence and violence against children!
- Intimidation lawsuits, disproportionate lawsuits and the abusive use of legal means must be prevented! (Similar to the ban on SLAPP lawsuits against journalists). Mothers must be protected as they protect their children!
- Judges and all professions entrusted with guardianship proceedings in the broadest sense must provide evidence of mandatory training on violence protection, victim protection and perpetrator-victim dynamics!
- Statistics that determine the cause of proceedings that have lasted for years must be collected by the courts and evaluated as part of a study.
About the organization:
The Feminist Single Parents Association – FEM.A is unique in Austria with its advice and services on the topics of maintenance, custody and contact law. It ranges from free webinars with lawyers and psychologists, relief discussions on the free FEM.A telephone, to information on the website, in a regular newsletter, as well as on various social media channels, networking, exchange of experiences and lobbying.
Questions & Contact:
Association of Feminist Single Parents – FEM.A
Andrea Czak, MA
Managing Chairwoman
+43 6991 97 10 306
andrea.czak@verein-fema.at
https://www.verein-fema.at