Debbs Murray is a survivor of domestic violence and now heads Eclipse. Photo: supplied
A family violence specialist says she is regularly contacted by women who say their abusive partner has shared custody of their kids and they wish they never left.
It comes as newly released information reveals officials shelved work to see how families in custody battles could be better screened for domestic violence.
Debbs Murray is a survivor of domestic violence and now heads Eclipse, a service that aims to prevent family violence and train those working in the sector.
She said it breaks her heart to hear from women who say their abusive ex-partners are given unsupervised custody of their children.
"I get emails from women who say I should've just stayed because the Family Court has allowed my children to go unsupervised to a known family violence abuser and if I'd stayed at least I would've had eyes on."
Murray said every case in the Family Court needs to be screened for violence, but they are not.
She is often contacted by women who want to have a formal risk assessment conducted by an expert.
"That's part of why I'm contacted as well, because they want someone anyone to be able to present the risk that they are experiencing into the judicial space."
Backbone Collective advocates for survivors of domestic violence and received a raft of information from the Ministry of Justice about introducing a formal risk assessment for those embroiled in family law proceedings.
The response showed Family Court Principal Judge Jackie Moran had started the work but it had been shut down at steering committee level in 2023.
A Ministry presentation included in the official information response stated they did not know if people coming to the Family Court have experienced family violence.
Backbone's manager and co-founder Deborah Mackenzie said that's a big gap and puts a lot of responsibility on the court-appointed psychologists and lawyers who assess such situations.
"What we know from everything victim survivors and children have shared with Backbone is that the reports they're giving to Family Court judges often minimise the violence and abuse or they don't believe protective parents and children when they disclose violence and abuse."
She said it's putting some people - mostly women and children - at risk.
"The judiciary are making decisions that force children into unsupervised care and contact with abusive parents as a result."
Ministry of Justice group manager for commissioning and service improvement Lance Harrison said court staff may identify risk factors informally then refer the participant to a support service that must conduct formal risk assessments.
He said family violence response training is also provided to people working in the courts.
University of Auckland associate professor of law, Carrie Leonetti, said the Family Court accepts evidence of domestic violence only from court-appointed psychologists and lawyers.
"Women go to places like Shine and they go to places like Women's Refuge and they get an evidence based risk assessment done," she said.
"That evidence based risk assessment says this child is not safe in the care of the other parent or it is not safe for this person to have shared legal guardianship with the perpetrator it will put them at risk and the Family Court won't accept the evidence."
Carrie Leonetti is also a professorial lecturer in law at George Washington University's domestic violence programme.
At times she is approached to do risk assessments.
"I've had women come to me and want to contract, privately, reports from me and I've had to say to them they won't take it in evidence. The court won't consider anything an expert in domestic violence has to say they won't even admit the evidence. They only want to hear from their court psychologist."
She says it is out of keeping with international practice and does not have to be that way.
Leonetti believed it comes down to the Family Court's interpretation of section 133 of the Care of Children Act - which enables the court to hire psychologist to assess a child's best interests.
"For years not the Family Court has interpreted section 133 of the Care of Children Act to mean that they won't take evidence from any psychologists or any social workers or any psychiatrists other than the ones that they appoint and assign to the case."
Backbone Collective is calling for the Minister of Justice to fund and progress work to ensure victims of family violence are identified and not put at further risk in custody disputes.
Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
