The Council of Europe Delivers Scathing Criticism of the Danish Family Law System.
Below is a summary of the findings from the Council of Europe expert group GREVIO:
Child cases are improperly screened when the perpetrator files a case, as only one parent fills out the screening form, and the perpetrator omits information about violence.
Cases involving domestic violence are categorized together with substance abuse and mental health issues. No specific risk assessment is conducted based on violence.
Victims of violence are not automatically offered separate meetings, waiting rooms, or entrances, exposing them to retraumatization and risk.
Victims of violence are pressured to engage in mediation and agreements with perpetrators to avoid being perceived as "uncooperative" (a lack of cooperation can result in losing child custody).
Family law guidelines portray abused women as "uncooperative" and "obstructive regarding visitation."
Professionals in the family law system view women’s truthful accounts of violence as "visitation interference" or "lack of cooperation."
Abused parents are forced to accompany children during visitation or participate in visits, disregarding the risk of retraumatization or repeated violence.
The Family Law House shares protected information such as residence and the child's school or daycare, meant to prevent violence or abduction, with the abusive parent.
Professionals at the Family Law House classify violence as "conflict," and children’s reluctance to be with an abusive parent is seen as "manipulation by the other parent."
Children's accounts of violence rarely result in municipal notification. Instead, the municipality is informed about "manipulation."
GREVIO criticizes Denmark's focus on parental cooperation in cases of domestic violence.
Legislation does not clearly mandate taking violence into account in decisions about custody and visitation unless there is a criminal conviction.
Social Ministry guidelines prioritize parental cooperation over the investigation of domestic violence when assessing the child’s best interest.
Child expert evaluations and interviews are often conducted by psychologists who are negatively biased against victims of violence.
Mothers who withhold their children to protect them are pressured to allow visitation and are accused of parental alienation by the Family Law House and courts.
Women's shelters report that the family law system consistently distrusts and undermines their assessments, instead accusing mothers of using shelters to keep children away from fathers.
The term "parental alienation" is practically used to discredit women’s reports of violence and their concerns for their children’s safety.
Exceptions to contact bans can jeopardize victims' safety, especially during visitation involving a parent with a restraining order.
Lack of coordination and lack of sharing knowledge and experiences among municipalities, police, and the family law system hampers victims’ access to protection and justice.
GREVIO’s Recommendations:
Ensure screening and risk assessment processes are implemented in the Family Law House and family courts to identify violence in custody and visitation cases.
New guidelines from the Social Ministry must promote an understanding of the impact of violence on children.
Thoroughly investigate reports of violence by improving collaboration with criminal justice, police, health authorities, and women’s shelters.
Appoint professionals experienced in violence against women and Istanbul Convention requirements to advise on custody cases.
Avoid introducing "parental alienation" into Danish legislation.
Extend restraining orders to cover the entire family, including visitation, and introduce separate entrances and waiting rooms in violence-related cases to prevent parents from meeting.
Investigate parents’ concerns for their children’s safety rather than dismissing them as "conflict" or "lack of cooperation."
The Council of Europe report from December 18, 2024, can be read here: 1680b2d30b
Comments