The Domestic Abuse Act 2021 Is Under Review: What Litigants in Person Need to Know
The Domestic Abuse Act 2021 was meant to mark a turning point: a clear statutory recognition that domestic abuse is not limited to physical violence. It includes coercive control, economic abuse, psychological abuse, emotional abuse and other forms of behaviour that can trap a person long after a relationship has ended. But as the House of Lords Domestic Abuse Act 2021 Committee now asks whether the statutory definition is working in practice, litigants in person in the family court need to pay close attention — because the gap between what the law says and what happens in real cases can be devastating for parents and children.
Is the Domestic Abuse Act 2021 Working? Why Litigants in Person Need to Watch This Inquiry Closely
Category: Family Court, Domestic Abuse, Litigants in Person, Legal Process, Access to Justice
The House of Lords is now examining whether the Domestic Abuse Act 2021 is working in practice. That matters enormously for litigants in person, especially parents in private children proceedings, because the statutory definition of domestic abuse affects how allegations are recognised, how risk is assessed, how children are understood as victims, and how the family court approaches safeguarding.
This is not a remote Westminster issue. This is about what happens when a parent walks into the family court without a solicitor, tries to explain coercive control, economic abuse, post-separation abuse, faith-based abuse, honour-based abuse, tech-facilitated abuse, or the impact on children — and finds that the system is still better at recognising obvious physical violence than patterns of control.
On Thursday 21 May 2026, the House of Lords Domestic Abuse Act 2021 Committee took oral evidence as part of its inquiry into the Act. The session considered whether the statutory definition properly captures different forms of abuse, including economic abuse, faith and spiritual abuse, tech-facilitated abuse, honour-based abuse and coercive control.
The Committee’s wider inquiry is considering the impact and effectiveness of the Domestic Abuse Act 2021, including whether there are gaps in the legislation. The Committee has said it will report by 30 November 2026. You can read more about the inquiry and call for evidence on the UK Parliament website.
Why this matters for litigants in person
If the legal definition is too narrow in practice, victims are forced to translate lived reality into legal language the court will recognise.
That is especially difficult for litigants in person, who are often already exhausted, frightened, traumatised, financially stretched and trying to navigate a system designed around legal professionals.
The Domestic Abuse Act 2021: what it currently says
The Domestic Abuse Act 2021 created a statutory definition of domestic abuse in England and Wales. The Act makes clear that domestic abuse is not limited to physical violence.
Under section 1 of the Act, behaviour may be abusive if it consists of:
- physical or sexual abuse;
- violent or threatening behaviour;
- controlling or coercive behaviour;
- economic abuse;
- psychological, emotional or other abuse.
The definition applies where both people are aged 16 or over and are “personally connected”. The Act also recognises children as victims of domestic abuse in their own right where they see, hear or experience the effects of abuse and are related to either the victim or the perpetrator.
You can read the legislation directly here: Domestic Abuse Act 2021.
The Act was a major step forward. But the question now is whether it is working on the ground — in police responses, safeguarding decisions, Cafcass assessments, local authority practice, criminal proceedings and family court cases.
The problem: recognition on paper is not the same as recognition in court
Many litigants in person understand this problem immediately. The law may contain the words “coercive control”, “economic abuse” and “psychological abuse”, but that does not mean those forms of abuse are consistently identified, evidenced, pleaded, investigated or acted upon.
In family proceedings, this can create a serious evidential gap. A parent may know they have been controlled, monitored, isolated, financially restricted, intimidated or manipulated. But unless that pattern is set out clearly, chronologically and with evidence, the court may treat it as “conflict”, “poor communication” or “parental disagreement”.
That distinction matters. Domestic abuse is not the same thing as ordinary relationship conflict. Coercive control is not simply two parents who do not get along. Economic abuse is not just money stress. Tech abuse is not just someone being “too interested” in your phone or location. Faith or spiritual abuse is not simply a difference in beliefs. Honour-based abuse is not a “family dispute”.
For litigants in person, the key issue is this:
You cannot assume the court, Cafcass, the police or the other party’s solicitor will automatically understand the pattern. You need to make the pattern visible.
What the Committee considered on 21 May 2026
The Committee’s evidence session looked at whether the statutory definition properly captures different forms of abuse. The witnesses listed for the session were:
- Dr Nicola Sharp-Jeffs OBE, Independent Economic Abuse Expert;
- Professor Lisa Oakley, Professor of Safeguarding and Knowledge Exchange at University of Chester;
- Jen Reed, Head of Policy at UCL Gender and Tech Research Group;
- Natasha Rattu, expert on forced marriage at Karma Nirvana;
- Dr Cassandra Wiener, Reader in Law at City St George’s, University of London.
The themes included:
- how the statutory definition applies to different forms of domestic abuse;
- awareness of different forms of abuse;
- whether the definition of being “personally connected” is wide enough;
- whether the age limit in the statutory definition is appropriate.
You can view the Committee meeting page here: 21 May 2026 Domestic Abuse Act 2021 Committee evidence session.
Economic abuse: when money becomes a method of control
Economic abuse is expressly recognised in the Domestic Abuse Act 2021. That was a significant legal development. It means the law recognises that abuse can involve control over money, property, employment, housing, transport, food, debt and financial independence.
For litigants in person, economic abuse may appear in evidence such as:
- being prevented from working or studying;
- having wages, benefits or child maintenance controlled;
- being forced into debt;
- being denied access to bank accounts or financial information;
- being left without money for food, fuel, transport or children’s essentials;
- post-separation financial control, including withholding payments, weaponising child maintenance, delaying property matters or using litigation costs as pressure.
The specialist charity Surviving Economic Abuse explains how the Act recognises economic abuse and how economic abuse can continue after separation.
Practical point for litigants in person
If you are alleging economic abuse, do not simply say “he controlled the money” or “she ruined me financially”. Set out specific examples, dates, documents and impact. Show the court how the financial behaviour created dependency, fear, restriction, pressure or control.
Tech-facilitated abuse: the law is still catching up
Technology has changed the landscape of domestic abuse. Abuse can now be carried out through phones, apps, location tracking, smart devices, online accounts, shared cloud storage, children’s devices, banking apps, social media, email accounts, spyware and digital surveillance.
Examples may include:
- tracking a person’s location through their phone, car, child’s device or shared account;
- accessing emails, cloud storage, photographs or messages without consent;
- using children’s phones or tablets to monitor the other parent;
- installing spyware or monitoring apps;
- using smart doorbells, cameras, speakers or household devices to intimidate or monitor;
- repeated online harassment, fake accounts, impersonation or image-based abuse;
- weaponising parenting apps or communication platforms as a means of surveillance or harassment.
Recent reporting on the Committee session highlighted concerns that tech-facilitated abuse is still not sufficiently recognised as a central form of domestic abuse, even though it may fall under coercive control, psychological abuse or other forms of abusive behaviour. See, for example, this report: Domestic abuse law fails to recognise danger of tech abuse, Lords committee told.
Practical point for litigants in person
Do not delete digital evidence without taking advice. Preserve screenshots, account alerts, login notifications, device settings, messages, emails, app histories, location-sharing settings and incident logs. Keep a note of when you discovered the issue and what impact it had on your safety, privacy, parenting and mental health.
Faith and spiritual abuse: when belief is weaponised
Faith and spiritual abuse can be difficult for courts and professionals to identify because it may be hidden behind language of culture, belief, family expectation, religious duty or community pressure.
It may include:
- using religious teaching to justify control, submission or punishment;
- threatening spiritual consequences if someone leaves a relationship;
- forcing religious practices or preventing religious practice;
- using faith leaders, family or community members to pressure a victim;
- shaming, isolating or blaming the victim through religious language;
- telling children that one parent is immoral, unsafe or spiritually defective.
This matters in family court because faith and community pressure can affect a parent’s freedom, safety, support network and ability to make independent decisions. It can also affect children, especially where they are drawn into adult pressure, loyalty conflicts or spiritual fear.
Practical point for litigants in person
If faith, religion or community pressure forms part of the abuse, explain the mechanism of control. The court needs to understand what was said, who said it, what pressure was applied, what you were told would happen if you did not comply, and how this affected you or the children.
Honour-based abuse and forced marriage: not a private family matter
Honour-based abuse is often misunderstood. It may be presented as a family issue, a cultural issue, a relationship issue or a community issue. But where pressure, threats, violence, isolation, surveillance or coercion are used, the safeguarding risk can be serious.
Forced marriage and honour-based abuse may involve multiple perpetrators or enablers. The pressure may come from a partner, former partner, parent, sibling, extended family, community members or others. That can make it harder for victims to identify one single perpetrator or one single incident.
Specialist organisations such as Karma Nirvana provide support and information in this area.
Practical point for litigants in person
If there is honour-based abuse, forced marriage risk or community-based coercion, avoid presenting it as a general “family disagreement”. Set out the risk clearly, identify who is involved, explain any threats or pressure, and consider whether specialist safeguarding advice is needed urgently.
Coercive control: the pattern matters more than the isolated incident
Coercive control is one of the most important concepts for family court litigants in person to understand. It is often not one dramatic incident. It is a pattern.
The pattern may include:
- isolation from family, friends, work or support;
- monitoring movements, communications or spending;
- degrading, humiliating or threatening behaviour;
- rules about clothing, parenting, money, sex, religion or social contact;
- threats relating to children, immigration, housing, finances or reputation;
- post-separation control through contact arrangements, litigation, money, police reports or repeated accusations.
The Crown Prosecution Service guidance explains that domestic abuse is not a specific offence in itself, but a general term describing a range of behaviour that may fall under different offences. The CPS guidance also recognises that domestic abuse may cause lasting trauma and that victims may not always recognise what is happening as abusive behaviour. You can read the CPS guidance here: CPS Domestic Abuse Guidance.
Litigants in person: do not plead coercive control as a list of random complaints
The court needs to see the architecture of control. What was the behaviour? How often did it happen? What was the purpose or effect? How did it restrict your freedom, safety, parenting, finances, mental health or relationship with the children?
The “personally connected” issue
The statutory definition requires the parties to be personally connected. This includes spouses, civil partners, people who have agreed to marry, people who are or have been in an intimate personal relationship, people who have or had a parental relationship in relation to the same child, and relatives.
For many family court cases, this will cover former partners and co-parents. But the Committee’s inquiry is looking at whether the definition is working properly across different abuse contexts. This matters because some forms of abuse involve wider family networks, community actors, digital actors or people who may not fit neatly into the ordinary public understanding of a “domestic” relationship.
The age limit issue: what about children under 16?
The statutory definition applies where both people are aged 16 or over. The Act does, however, recognise children as victims where they see, hear or experience the effects of domestic abuse and are related to the victim or perpetrator.
This still leaves difficult questions. Abuse between young people, digital abuse among teenagers, coercive control in adolescent relationships, and the impact of domestic abuse on younger children are all areas where safeguarding practice must keep pace with reality.
Practical point for parents
If your child has seen, heard or experienced the effects of domestic abuse, say so clearly. Do not limit your evidence to what happened to you. Explain what the child saw, heard, noticed, changed, feared, repeated, avoided or disclosed.
Why this is especially important in private children proceedings
Domestic abuse frequently arises in private law children cases. These are cases about child arrangements, live-with orders, spend-time-with orders, parental responsibility, prohibited steps orders and specific issue orders.
For litigants in person, the issue is often not just whether domestic abuse happened. It is whether the abuse is properly connected to child welfare, risk, safe contact and future arrangements.
In practical terms, allegations of domestic abuse may affect:
- whether a C1A form should be filed;
- whether safeguarding checks are sufficient;
- whether Cafcass has properly understood the allegations;
- whether a fact-finding hearing is required;
- whether special measures are needed;
- whether direct cross-examination should be prevented;
- whether contact should be supervised, supported, indirect or paused;
- whether a pattern of post-separation abuse is continuing through litigation or child arrangements;
- whether the child is being exposed to emotional harm, pressure or adult conflict.
The Law Society’s overview of the Domestic Abuse Act 2021 notes that the Act prohibits offenders from cross-examining victims in person in the family courts and includes measures relating to special measures, protective orders and support for victims. You can read the Law Society overview here: Domestic Abuse Act 2021 — The Law Society.
What litigants in person should do now
If you are involved in family proceedings and domestic abuse is relevant, this inquiry should prompt you to review how your case is being presented. The court can only work with the evidence and structure placed before it.
| Issue | What to do in your case |
|---|---|
| Coercive control | Create a chronology showing the pattern over time, not just isolated incidents. |
| Economic abuse | Gather bank statements, messages, debt letters, benefit records, maintenance records, employment evidence and examples of financial restriction. |
| Tech abuse | Preserve screenshots, device alerts, account access records, app settings, location-sharing evidence and suspicious login notifications. |
| Children’s exposure | Record what the child saw, heard, experienced, disclosed or changed in behaviour. Keep the focus on welfare, not adult grievance. |
| Faith, spiritual or honour-based abuse | Explain the pressure mechanism, who was involved, what was threatened, and how it affected safety or decision-making. |
| Post-separation abuse | Show how control continued after separation through money, communication, contact arrangements, litigation, threats or monitoring. |
| Cafcass concerns | Identify exactly what Cafcass missed, misunderstood or failed to analyse. Tie your criticism to evidence and welfare impact. |
A simple evidence structure
For each allegation, try using this format:
- Date or approximate period: When did it happen?
- Behaviour: What exactly happened?
- Evidence: What document, message, screenshot, witness or record supports it?
- Impact on you: How did it affect your safety, freedom, finances, health or decision-making?
- Impact on the child: What did the child see, hear, experience or suffer?
- Relevance to orders sought: Why does this matter for child arrangements, safety or welfare?
Why “high conflict” language can be dangerous
One of the biggest problems for litigants in person is the casual use of the phrase “high conflict”. In some cases, that phrase is accurate. In others, it flattens domestic abuse into mutual hostility.
That matters because domestic abuse is about power, control, fear, restriction and harm. If a case is wrongly framed as mutual conflict, the protective lens can be lost. The court may then focus on encouraging communication or co-parenting without properly addressing risk.
This is why evidence has to be precise. The court needs to know whether it is dealing with two difficult adults who need boundaries, or a pattern of abuse where one person has used power and control against the other and/or the children.
The family court question is not simply: “Did the parents argue?”
The real safeguarding question is: has one person used behaviour to control, frighten, isolate, monitor, punish, exploit or dominate the other — and what does that mean for the child?
Domestic Abuse Protection Orders: still important, but not the whole answer
The Domestic Abuse Act 2021 introduced Domestic Abuse Protection Notices and Domestic Abuse Protection Orders. These are intended to provide more flexible protection for victims. The DAPO pilot began in November 2024 and, according to the judiciary, has been piloted in areas including Greater Manchester, Croydon, Bromley, Sutton, Cleveland, North Wales and with the British Transport Police.
You can read the judiciary’s update here: Pilot starts for Domestic Abuse Protection Orders.
Protective orders matter. But they are not a substitute for proper understanding of abuse in the family court. A protective order may manage immediate risk. It does not, by itself, ensure that Cafcass, the court, local authorities or professionals properly understand the pattern of abuse or the impact on children.
What this inquiry should make every litigant in person ask
If you are representing yourself in a case involving domestic abuse, ask yourself:
- Have I clearly identified the type or types of abuse alleged?
- Have I separated domestic abuse from ordinary relationship conflict?
- Have I shown the pattern over time?
- Have I evidenced post-separation abuse?
- Have I explained the impact on the children?
- Have I asked for special measures if needed?
- Have I challenged weak or incomplete safeguarding analysis?
- Have I connected the evidence to the welfare checklist and the orders I am asking the court to make?
How to follow or contribute to the Committee’s work
The House of Lords Committee has invited interested individuals and organisations to submit views as part of its inquiry. The Committee cannot help with individual cases or complaints, but its work may influence how the Act is understood and whether reform is recommended.
You can find the Committee page here: Domestic Abuse Act 2021 Committee.
You can find the call for evidence here: Call for evidence launched into the impact of the Domestic Abuse Act 2021.
The Committee has also provided the following contact email: hldomesticabuseact2021@parliament.uk.
Important
If you are in immediate danger, call 999. If you cannot speak, follow the silent solution procedure when prompted. If you are experiencing domestic abuse, consider contacting a specialist domestic abuse service for support before taking steps that may increase risk.
Final thought: the law must see the abuse people are actually living through
The Domestic Abuse Act 2021 was an important milestone. But legislation is only useful if it works in real life.
For litigants in person, the risk is that modern forms of abuse are still being missed, minimised or mislabelled. Economic abuse may be treated as money trouble. Tech abuse may be treated as paranoia. Spiritual abuse may be treated as a private belief issue. Honour-based abuse may be treated as family tension. Coercive control may be reduced to “communication problems”.
That is not good enough.
Children need courts and professionals who can recognise the full pattern of domestic abuse. Victims need a system that does not require them to be legally trained before they are believed. Litigants in person need clear information, practical tools and a court process that understands abuse beyond bruises.
This inquiry matters because it asks the right question: is the statutory definition of domestic abuse working?
For many people in the family court system, the honest answer may be: not well enough yet.
Need help presenting domestic abuse evidence in family court?
JSH Law supports litigants in person with structured case preparation, chronologies, position statements, C1A preparation, safeguarding issue summaries, hearing preparation and practical family court support.
The aim is simple: to help you present the evidence clearly, calmly and in a format the court can understand.
Useful links
- 21 May 2026 Domestic Abuse Act 2021 Committee evidence session
- House of Lords call for evidence on the Domestic Abuse Act 2021
- Domestic Abuse Act 2021
- CPS Domestic Abuse Guidance
- The Law Society: Domestic Abuse Act 2021
- Surviving Economic Abuse: Economic abuse and the Domestic Abuse Act
- Judiciary: Domestic Abuse Protection Orders pilot
- Karma Nirvana
About JSH Law
JSH Law provides practical litigation support for litigants in person, with a particular focus on family court preparation, safeguarding issues, domestic abuse allegations, child arrangements proceedings and court-ready documents.
JSH Law is not an SRA-regulated firm and does not conduct reserved legal activities. Support is focused on practical case preparation, procedural assistance and litigation support for people representing themselves.
Regulatory & Editorial Notice
This article is provided for general information and public legal education only. It is not legal advice and should not be relied upon as a substitute for advice from a regulated solicitor, barrister or specialist domestic abuse service. Every family court case turns on its own facts, evidence, procedural history and safeguarding context.
Where this article refers to third-party organisations, Parliamentary material, charities, public bodies or media reports, those references are included for commentary and signposting purposes only. Inclusion does not imply endorsement, partnership or responsibility for third-party content.
