£15m to Tackle Misogyny: Why Economic Abuse Matters in Family Court

The 2026 Budget allocates £15 million to the Office for the Impact Economy to work with businesses, investors and philanthropists on initiatives supporting women and girls. The government announcement of 27 October describes £5 million per year over three years, including possible mentoring, workplace training and public awareness campaigns. This is prevention funding. It is not a direct payment to victims, a new legal aid entitlement or an alteration of the Family Court’s legal tests.

In the LinkedIn post prompting this article, Surviving Economic Abuse (SEA) wrote: “Misogyny and economic abuse are two sides of the same coin.” Its published awareness material estimates that one in six UK women — about 4.2 million — experienced economic abuse by a current or former partner within a 12-month period. See SEA’s published figures. Economic abuse can limit independence long after someone leaves a relationship. It affects people of different genders; the legal definition is not restricted to women. Credit for the observation and research belongs to SEA; this article is independent analysis, not an endorsement.

Section 1(4) of the Domestic Abuse Act 2021 defines economic abuse as behaviour having a substantial adverse effect on another person’s ability to acquire, use or maintain money or other property, or obtain goods or services. The statutory domestic abuse definition requires the parties to be aged at least 16 and personally connected. Examples may include restricting access to wages or benefits, obstructing work or education, coercing debt, interfering with essential transport or housing, or threatening to withhold resources as a means of control. Not every financial disagreement is abuse. The conduct, impact and evidence must be examined in context; the 2021 Act’s recognition does not make every example a separate criminal offence.

Control may move from household accounts to child maintenance, disputed debts, housing threats, access to documents or pressure about court proceedings. A legitimate dispute or application is not automatically abusive merely because the other person finds it difficult. The question may be whether the evidence establishes threats, conditional payments or a broader controlling pattern. The criminal offence of controlling or coercive behaviour under section 76 of the Serious Crime Act 2015 was expanded for qualifying post-separation conduct from 5 April 2023 without the former cohabitation requirement; the change is not retrospective and other elements of the offence still apply.

The child’s welfare remains paramount in Children Act 1989 decisions. Practice Direction 12J requires consideration of relevant alleged, admitted or otherwise evidenced domestic abuse, appropriate risk and safeguarding issues, and proportionate directions. Children may be victims of domestic abuse when they see, hear or experience its effects in the circumstances specified by the Domestic Abuse Act 2021. Economic control might affect housing, routines, employment, parental capacity or children’s access to essentials. But hardship alone does not establish abuse or dictate an outcome in child arrangements proceedings. The judge must distinguish allegations from findings and decide which disputed matters need determination. Re H-N and Others [2021] EWCA Civ 448 stresses the importance of examining patterns of coercive behaviour holistically rather than isolating individual incidents. A separate fact-finding hearing is not automatic.

Start with a dated chronology: what happened, who said or did it, the original source, and the claimed effect. Keep bank statements, messages with surrounding context, maintenance records, benefits correspondence, loan documents and relevant employment records. For example: “On 14 March I received a message making the maintenance payment conditional upon changing the proposed child arrangements. I have retained the message and the relevant account statement.” This is an illustrative allegation, not a finding. Identify contrary or missing material. Explain any effect on participation in court or the child’s welfare. Preserve original digital files and comply with orders governing filing, service and disclosure. Do not access someone else’s accounts unlawfully, share private child proceedings papers improperly or ask children to investigate adult issues.

Where relevant harm is alleged in a private children case, Form C1A may be used to raise or respond to allegations. It is not a finding in itself. Under Family Procedure Rules Part 3A and Practice Direction 3AA, the court must consider appropriate participation measures, which may include screens or video links. Particular rules address domestic abuse, but participation assumptions are not proof of allegations. In appropriate cases, section 91(14) and PD12Q may protect against harm from repeated applications by requiring permission for specified future applications. This is not a blanket bar on access to court. A non-molestation or occupation order may be available under the Family Law Act 1996 if its requirements are met; FL401 guidance explains the process. These remedies do not automatically resolve debt liability or maintenance.

The Child Maintenance Service can assess, collect and enforce qualifying maintenance; parents should discuss safer payment routes where necessary. Distinguish an administrative payment dispute from evidence that maintenance is being used as part of a wider pattern of coercion. In divorce financial remedies, disclosure of assets, liabilities, income and needs may be required. Economic abuse can be relevant to contested debt and financial vulnerability, but does not automatically move every debt to the other party. Legal aid may be available for eligible family matters involving domestic abuse, including financial control, subject to evidential, financial and case criteria. GOV.UK guidance confirms that potential applicants need not obtain all evidence before first approaching a legal aid adviser. Check Help with Fees for qualifying court fees.

This is a practical preparation framework, not a statutory legal test.

1. What happened, when, and to whom?
2. What original evidence supports or contradicts it?
3. Is each point alleged, admitted, or already found by a court?
4. Is there a pattern beyond a single financial dispute?
5. What is the specific impact on safety, welfare, independence or participation?
6. What direction or remedy is actually needed?

Organised answers make the alleged pattern easier to investigate and give the other party a fair opportunity to respond. Avoid filing a mass of unsorted screenshots.

Surviving Economic Abuse provides practical information and economic safety resources. The National Domestic Abuse Helpline on 0808 2000 247 supports women in England. The Men’s Advice Line provides specialist support for male victims. If there is immediate danger, call 999. Where devices or bank accounts may be monitored, seek specialist safety advice before making changes. For court proceedings, check the latest sealed order and deadlines first.