Speaker 1: 0:00

What if I told you that everything that we've exposed in this series the professional incompetence, the 20-year policy failure, the systematic harm to kids could be addressed with evidence-based approaches that actually work, and that we actually know exactly what protects kids post-separation? And it looks nothing like what we've been doing. Welcome to the Post-Separation Abuse Podcast, the podcast that is disrupting the status quo in post-separation parenting. I'm your host, danielle Black, and I'm here to say the things that protective parents already know in their bones but that the system and many of the people that work in the system just simply don't want to hear. For too long, policy and professionals have closed ranks and our kids have paid the price. This space isn't about preserving the old myths. It's about child safety, recovery and truth, and if that makes me disruptive in this space, then so be it, because it's time that we start putting kids first after separation. Over this series, we've exposed some uncomfortable truths. In episode one, we covered the fact that family court professionals systematically fail to identify coercive control. That the research tells us dramatically increases children's risk of PTSD. That the research tells us dramatically increases children's risk of PTSD, depression and anxiety. This incompetence weaponises the entire system against protective parents and children. In episode two, we spoke about the way that the 2006, quote progressive amendments to the Family Law Act actually made children less safe by maximising their exposure to harmful patterns and training professionals to prioritise contact over safety. The result 20 years of policy failure that created the professional competence crisis that we see today. As always, this is about protecting all kids from all harmful patterns, regardless of which parent displays them.

Speaker 1: 2:08

To anyone who might be thinking that this content is anti-father, I want to make it very clear that that is not the case. None of my work is anti-father. Rather, it's pro-child. My focus with all of the work that I do is about prioritising what kids need post-separation, what keeps kids safe post-separation, what promotes children's wellbeing and overall best interests after separation. Today we're going to dive into what evidence-based child protection actually looks like. We'll explore what the research tells us about what really protects kids post-separation, how other countries implement child-focused approaches, the reform framework that Australia needs, what you can do right now to protect your kids within this broken system.

Speaker 1: 2:58

Let's start with what the evidence actually shows. When we strip away ideology and look at what research actually shows protects kids post-separation, a pretty clear framework emerges. We really have to come at this from a safety first angle. Protecting kids must be the primary consideration, with contact arrangements being secondary to child safety. There needs to be individual assessment. Each family's individual circumstances should be assessed rather than families being forced into presumptive frameworks. Stability must also be a priority, with primary caregiver relationships prioritised because they provide the foundation for children's security and development, and it's important to note that that's not ideology, that's supported by research. We need to focus on quality over quantity. Research also tells us that relationship quality matters far more than time quantity for kids' wellbeing post-separation, and our kids should have a voice. Children's experiences and preferences must be genuinely considered, not dismissed as quote alienation.

Speaker 1: 4:09

In episode one we discussed the research from the University of Queensland. That research told us that children exposed to coercive control have dramatically higher risks of PTSD, depression and anxiety over the course of their lives. This risk compounds with exposure time to those harmful patterns. An evidence-based system would use this research to minimise kids' exposure to harmful patterns whilst maintaining safe connection, if safe connection was indeed possible. An evidence-based system would use the research to prioritise stability with protective caregivers for recovery and support, and to monitor kids carefully for signs of harm during any contact with the non-primary parent. An evidence-based system would also use the research to adjust arrangements based on children's actual well-being rather than adult needs and adult demands. Decades of attachment research tell us that children need one consistent, responsive primary caregiver as their secure base, that they need predictable care from emotionally available and emotionally tuned-in adults, that they need protection from overwhelming stress that can disrupt their developing nervous system, and that they need stability in their routine and environment for optimal development. Evidence-based practice would prioritize these needs over and above maximizing contact time with both parents. Children who have experienced family violence need safety and predictability to allow their nervous systems to regulate. They need limited exposure to triggering situations while they heal. They need professional support from trauma-informed practitioners who understand the nuances of family violence and ongoing post-separation abuse. And they need gradual, carefully monitored parenting time arrangements, with any increase in parenting time also being very gradual and carefully monitored, related to them demonstrating readiness.

Speaker 1: 6:20

Countries with better outcomes for kids use evidence-based approaches. In the Scandinavian model, safety is a primary consideration in all arrangements. There's an individual assessment over presumptive frameworks, there's professional training in child development and trauma and there's regular reviews based on kids' actual adjustments. The approach in the Netherlands is comprehensive family assessment before contact decisions. A child's voice is genuinely included in the planning, there's flexibility to adjust based on outcomes and there's professional accountability for child well-being. Best practice elements emerge across these systems Graduated contact plans that build around child adjustment, frameworks that explicitly allow limited or no contact where safety requires it. Evidence-based decision making, not ideological defaults. And competence requirements for professionals before they're actually put in a position of being able to make life-altering recommendations.

Speaker 1: 7:23

So what does evidence-based practice look like in the real world? At the initial assessment stage, it looks like a comprehensive history of family violence using validated tools, assessment of each child's developmental stage and needs, evaluation of each parent's capacity for safe, responsive, attuned caregiving. And risk analysis using evidence-based frameworks. Evidence-based practice also looks like appropriate planning of arrangements with a default to stability with the primary caregiver, plus meaningful but safe contact with the other parent, increasing parenting time gradually only if safety and child adjustment are demonstrated. Individual tailoring rather than cookie cutter approaches, and built-in review points tied to child outcomes. Evidence-based practice also requires strong professional requirements Mandatory training in coercive control, trauma and child development, use of validated assessment tools, not just subjective impressions, and accountability for providing recommendations that fail to adequately protect children. All of this would also include a national training framework for any professional who's writing reports as part of the family law process. And, to be clear, there currently is not a national training framework for report writers. This is why the quality of reports and the competence of report writers varies so greatly around the country. Evidence-based practice also includes system safeguards, regular reviews on child wellbeing, immediate response protocols when safety concerns arise, mechanisms for children to express their voice without being pathologised if there's reluctance or resistance to contact with the other parent, and meaningful consequences for professional incompetence.

Speaker 1: 9:34

Now let's talk about what's actually happening in Australia right now. Despite the changes that have been made to the Family Law Act, instead of safety first, we're still seeing significant time and equal time frameworks, even though the Family Law Act doesn't mandate significant time or equal time. It's been interpreted and applied that way for nearly 20 years. We're still seeing a contact at all costs culture where children's exposure to harm is often significantly minimised and quote maintaining the relationship is maximised. We're still seeing professional incompetence, family consultants, mediators, even some judicial registrars, senior judicial registrars and also even some judges continuing to dismiss coercive control or simply not being able to recognise it, along with ignoring children's trauma symptoms and a pathologisation of protective parents. And we're seeing a significant lack of accountability. There's no consequences when professionals make harmful decisions, even when kids are demonstrably worse off.

Speaker 1: 10:54

So what does this mean for our kids? What it means in the real world is that every day, there are children being forced into unsafe arrangements where their nervous systems are staying in fight or flight mode, where their attachment to their safe caregiver is disrupted or undermined, where their voice is silenced or, worse, treated as quote evidence of parental alienation and where they're left to carry the long-term impacts Risk of PTSD, depression, anxiety, relational difficulties, educational struggles. The list goes on. And for protective parents, they're gaslit by the very system that is meant to protect their children. Their evidence of harm is minimised, dismissed or used against them. They're pressured to agree to unsafe compromises, to quote look reasonable, and their advocacy for safety is often reframed as hostility or obstruction. This is how the system has turned protection into pathology and why reform really should not be optional anymore. It needs to happen if we're serious about protecting our kids.

Speaker 1: 12:10

So what does it actually look like to put kids first after separation? The good news is is that we don't have to reinvent the wheel. The research is already there and it's really clear. Number one is. Safety is the starting point. Every single case must begin with one question Is this child safe? If the answer is no, because of coercive control, neglect or other forms of family violence or abuse, then the legal system must prioritise protection over and above a relationship with the problematic parent. Safety has to be a foundation, not just a footnote. We have to have a child development lens. Decisions should reflect what we know from decades of research in child development and attachment. Again, we don't have to reinvent the wheel here. The information, the evidence is clear. Kids need stability, routine and a secure base with their primary caregiver. Overnight time should be avoided before four years of age. High conflict and unsafe environments derail kids' development, and significant time or equal time is not in most kids' best interests. Now it's important here to note that this can depend entirely on the safety piece, the age of children and their emotional needs.

Speaker 1: 13:40

There also needs to be genuine accountability for professionals. When experts and decision makers get it wrong and harm is done to kids, there must be consequences. Right now, professionals in Australia face zero accountability for biased, incompetent or negligent work. Any reform must include transparent standards and independent oversight, along with, as I mentioned earlier in the episode, a national framework for training, and it shouldn't just stop at a national framework for training. There should also be mandated ongoing professional development. We also need to elevate kids' voices. Children deserve to be heard in ways that are developmentally appropriate, trauma-informed and free from adult manipulation, and this means moving away from tokenistic, quote child-inclusive practice and towards genuine participation that has safeguards in place to keep them safe from retaliation. This is where the accountability piece for professionals also comes into play, because professionals currently don't have the understanding, the training, the knowledge to identify when kids have been influenced or coached by an abusive parent.

Speaker 1: 15:05

That's also something that needs to be part of the reform to the system. That needs to be part of the reform to the system, and there needs to be far more support for protective parents. Kids thrive when their primary caregiver is safe, supported and emotionally stable. The system should be strengthening protective parents, not undermining or punishing them for speaking out about harm, and not putting pressure on them to accept harmful arrangements from incompetent professionals. None of this is radical. It really is just basic child-centred policy. But because the family law system in Australia is still operating in denial, all of this stuff can often sound very disruptive, and that's exactly why we need to disrupt it. While we wait for systemic reform, kids need protection today. Here's what protective parents can do right now to strengthen their position and safeguard their kids.

Speaker 1: 16:08

Number one document everything. Keep clear, detailed records of incidents, including professional interactions and your children's reactions to the parenting time arrangements. Patterns matter more than isolated events, and this is where Regular documentation is important. The clearer the patterns are, the harder they are to dismiss. Number two use the research. Don't argue with your emotions or your feelings as the basis. Use the facts. Quote research that shows children exposed to coercive control are at dramatically higher risk of PTSD, depression and anxiety. Ask professionals directly, such as quote how are you accounting for this evidence in your assessment? End quote.

Speaker 1: 17:07

Number three challenge professional competence. Professionals should be asked what training they have in identifying and assessing coercive control, what validated tools they use to assess risk and how they distinguish between conflict and abuse. If they can't provide you with an acceptable answer, take note. Add that to your documentation. With an acceptable answer, take note, add that to your documentation. Their lack of competence is evidence in itself.

Speaker 1: 17:39

Number four prioritize safe stability. Do what you can, when your child is in your care, to build your child's life around stability, routine and predictability with you as their secure base. This is what the evidence shows protects kids' nervous systems. Number five find the right allies. Seek professionals who get it. Those trained to recognize coercive control, trauma-informed practice, those that understand child development and attachment. Red flags are any professional who uses terms like alienation on their website, social media, linkedin page. Any professional who has anything to do with the alienation industry should be given a very wide berth, in my view. Number six protect your child's voice. Do what you can to create safe and age-appropriate ways for your kids to express how they feel, both with you and connecting them with other professionals such as counsellors, therapists, psychologists, where you're able to. When your kids express how they feel to you, document those after the fact as part of your broader documentation.

Speaker 1: 19:02

We've covered a lot in this three-part series. We've exposed the incompetence, the policy failures and the ideology that puts kids at risk. We've seen what evidence-based protection looks like and now you've got a few practical steps that you can take to help safeguard your kids, even though the system's very broken. Here's the bottom line. Kids exposed to coercive control are at significantly higher risk of PTSD, depression, anxiety and more. Far too many professionals still can't recognise these patterns. The 2006 policy changes maximised, not minimised, children's trauma exposure, and yet the evidence is clear. Safety and stability protect kids better than any formula or ideology ever will.

Speaker 1: 19:50

So the choice is in front of us as a society, we can keep accepting a system that sacrifices our kids for adult convenience, adult needs, adult emotions and ideologies of fairness, or we can demand better. We can demand evidence-based reform. As an individual parent, you can either wait and hope or you can use the tools that we've discussed to start protecting your kids right now. You can share this episode with other parents. You can start holding the professionals that you're working with to a higher standard.

Speaker 1: 20:23

It's also important that I note again that none of this is anti-father content. It's pro-child, and good fathers support evidence-based child protection. Our kids deserve nothing less. If you're ready to go deeper, the post-separation parenting blueprint brings everything together the research, the strategies, the frameworks to help you navigate post-separation parenting strategically with a view to protecting your kids. The wait list is currently open. You can find that on my website, danielleblackcoachingcomau.

Speaker 1: 21:00

Every day that we wait is another day that kids are being harmed. But we don't have to wait for reforms to do what we can now to start protecting our kids. The evidence is there, we just have to use it. And yet I know how hard it is. I know that families are being harmed every single day in Australia and in other countries because family law systems are more invested in protecting adults and supposed adult rights than in protecting kids. So many professionals who work in the family law space have closed ranks around outdated ideology and frameworks, and the result is that our kids are re-traumatized and left without the protection that they desperately need.

Speaker 1: 21:47

But that's why I'm here. I'm not interested in keeping the professionals comfortable. I'm here. I'm not interested in keeping the professionals comfortable. I'm interested in disrupting the status quo until child safety becomes the non-negotiable standard. If you're a protective parent listening to this, I want you to know you're not alone and you're not the problem. Your instincts to protect your children are valid and together, by naming the harms out loud, we can start to shift the culture. But change is not going to come from inside the system. It's going to come because parents, survivors and advocates refuse to stay quiet.

Speaker 1: 22:29

Thank you so much for joining me today on this episode of the Post-Separation Abuse Podcast. Remember, disrupting the status quo isn't comfortable, but our kids' safety, our kids' well-being. Our kids' best interests really do genuinely need to start coming first. If you found information in this podcast helpful, please consider sharing it with someone who needs to hear it. Please consider following the podcast so that you know when new episodes are released. Please consider rating or reviewing. That makes it so much easier for other protective parents to find it. And let's keep pushing together for change. We can all be changemakers. Thank you again for your time. I look forward to chatting with you soon.