Domestic Abuse: Children

Apsana Begum Excerpts

Thursday 27th November 2025 Westminster Hall

[Mr Richard Quigley (Isle of Wight West) (Lab)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered the matter of protecting children from domestic abuse.

You will be pleased to know what a marvellous pleasure it is to serve under your chairship, Ms Jardine. I would like to begin where we typically end our debates in Westminster Hall, and that is by thanking all hon. Members present. I am well aware that, on a topic such as this, what often compels people to speak is painful lived experience; so I sincerely thank everyone who has come here today, whether to bravely share their own experience or to represent the children in their constituency who otherwise do not have a voice in this place. It is appreciated and truly important.

This debate unfortunately stems from deep tragedy and systemic failure. As many will know, I have tabled it in honour of the 19 children killed by perpetrators of domestic abuse between 2015 and 2024. Their stories are solemn reminders of the danger of placing an outdated emphasis on parental contact above all else.

I recognise that there have been important strides in recent months, and I want to sincerely commend the work of my Government in repealing the presumption of parental contact in family courts and introducing a new police duty to notify schools of domestic abuse incidents. Those are significant steps forward, but we cannot stop here.

While I have rightly praised this Government, I also want to acknowledge the previous Government for introducing the Domestic Abuse Act 2021. We are here today because, for the first time, children were recognised as victims in their own right in that legislation. That Act was a vital step forward. It diagnosed the problem we face, but it did not provide an adequate cure.

Paragon, which does incredible work in my constituency of Isle of Wight West, told me:

“As children are now being recognised in their own right as victims of domestic abuse, we are seeing an increase in referrals for support. We have had no increase in funding to provide additional capacity to support children and young people and as a result we have a short waitlist in place. Waiting for this crucial support is not ideal.”

This reality is grimly reflected in the national picture. Women’s Aid’s “On Track” data reveals that there are more children than adults living in refuge spaces, but accessing a refuge does not mean that life returns to normal for those children. Further research by Women’s Aid shows that extended stays in refuge often disrupt education, school and routines. Many still face significant barriers to securing a school place after moving, because their mothers often have to cross local authority boundaries to stay safe. For those children, safety often comes at the cost of stability.

I am deeply grateful to have spoken with abuse survivors, including one of my constituents whose experience illustrates why prevention is so vital. As both a child victim and later a victim in her own relationship, she would have benefited enormously from early intervention. She has bravely agreed for me to share her story today. The following words are hers:

“Before I had even started primary school, domestic abuse had already shaped me. When home isn’t safe, fear becomes your earliest teacher. You don’t play freely in the world—you withdraw from it. Trust feels dangerous, friendships feel risky, and when every day is lived in the shadow of survival, confidence has no chance to bloom, nor your dreams any chance to grow. And in the classroom where children would feel free to learn and explore, that same fear follows you. Concentration becomes impossible, achievement feels out of reach, and you fall behind long before anyone realises, you’re not struggling with the work, you’re struggling with the trauma.

And, like so many children, I became part of a cycle that I never chose. After watching my mother suffer abuse, I unknowingly followed the same pattern. My daughter was born into a home where she, too, witnessed fear, control, and harm—things no child should ever see. Left unchecked, domestic abuse doesn’t just scar one generation; it echoes through the next.

What’s even more tragic is that my abuser had once been a child victim himself. He grew up watching violence without the support, education or therapy he so desperately needed. Without intervention, he grew into the only model he had ever known.

The cycle only ends when children are supported—when they are protected, when they learn about healthy relationships, are given tools to recognise abuse, and helped to heal from the trauma they witness. When they are shown that the devastating effects of domestic abuse do not have to be their inheritance.

I count myself lucky to live on the Isle of Wight, where support for my daughter exists—support that can quite literally save children’s futures. But across the country, too many children do not have this help. And without it, they stand little chance of breaking the cycle themselves.”

[Apsana Begum (Poplar and Limehouse) (Lab)]

I congratulate my hon. Friend on securing this important debate. Does he agree that, given that the concept of parental alienation—largely used by fathers against mothers in cases involving domestic violence in the family courts—does not have a robust, methodologically sound or scientific basis, the use of regulated and unregulated experts on it should be prohibited in the family courts?

[Mr Quigley]

There is very little I can add, other than to say that I wholeheartedly agree. That is a very important part of this debate, so I thank my hon. Friend sincerely.

That survivor’s story is, heartbreakingly, just one among many that I know will echo across our communities. In the year ending March 2024, an estimated 1.8 million children in England were affected by domestic abuse. Although 70% of affected children have stated that they would seek support for domestic abuse, 61% state that they would not know where to go to find it. The Government’s commitment to halving violence against women and girls is noble, but we must ensure that every child is protected, that court-ordered safeguards are robust, and that trauma support for newly single parents is properly funded. Education and community support must play a central role in breaking the cycle of intergenerational abuse, empowering future generations to prevent harm, protect potential victims and stop abusers before they begin to engage in this behaviour.

I therefore call on the Government to take the following actions: to amend the Children Act 1989 to reflect better the lived experience of children and young people affected by domestic abuse, and to embed our enhanced understanding of abuse, making it clear that coercive control constitutes harm to children; to publish a clear timeline for implementing the family court reforms recommended in the Ministry of Justice harm panel review of 2020; to roll out mandatory multi-agency training on domestic abuse across the family justice system; and to invest in the design and delivery of the violence against women and girls prevention programmes in schools and other educational settings. The political will is there, and I believe that we have the right voices in charge to enact the change that we need and that our children deserve, but we must take decisive action to stop this silent crisis from escalating into a catastrophe. We owe it not only to survivors, but to the women and children who are no longer with us. Their stories cannot be in vain.

--- Later in debate ---

[Helen Hayes (Dulwich and West Norwood) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to see you in the Chair, Ms Jardine. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Isle of Wight West (Mr Quigley) on securing this important debate and on his powerful opening speech.

For far too long, our understanding of the impact of domestic abuse on children failed to recognise the reality. Children do not simply witness domestic abuse, they experience it, they suffer it and they are profoundly affected by it. Living in a home in which domestic abuse is taking place is traumatising for children. It makes them feel frightened, insecure, sad and alone. It undermines the essential security that the home environment should provide. It affects children’s understanding of relationships and what is normal, and children often take on a completely misplaced sense of responsibility for what is happening or for protecting other members of the family.

These issues are, sadly, very widespread. One in seven children and young people will have an experience of domestic abuse at some point during their childhood. The Office for National Statistics records that, in 32% of domestic abuse cases, there was at least one child under the age of 16 living in the household.

The Domestic Abuse Commissioner’s recent report, “Victims in Their Own Right? Babies, children and young people’s experiences of domestic abuse”, is a sobering read. The commissioner listened extensively to children and young people affected by domestic abuse. They told her it is important that they are listened to, that they are taught how to recognise domestic abuse and that they receive proper support to recover from it.

They also told the commissioner about some of the barriers they experience in getting support, including failing to recognise that abuse is taking place and the influence of other family members. They also cited unwanted contact arrangements as a barrier. I therefore welcome the Government’s recent decision to end the presumption of contact, and I pay tribute to Claire Throssell, who has campaigned so hard in the name of her sons, Jack and Paul, to see this change in the law.

Claire’s case is utterly heartbreaking. The Education Committee was privileged to hear from her directly earlier this year during our inquiry into children’s social care. Jack and Paul’s father was abusive to Claire. It was one of the reasons—which they clearly expressed—that they did not want contact with him. They were murdered by their father on a contact visit mandated by the court. Jack and Paul were not listened to, and Claire was not listened to when she clearly warned of the danger—the tragedy of Jack and Paul’s deaths was the consequence.

The removal of the presumption of contact in cases of domestic abuse is a landmark moment in the protection of children from domestic abuse. It recognises that children are victims of domestic abuse in their own right, and that domestic abuse occurring in the home is also a significant risk factor for children. Women’s Aid reports that, over the past 30 years, 67 children have been killed by a parent who was also a perpetrator of domestic abuse in circumstances related to child contact arrangements, including Jack and Paul. As my hon. Friend the Member for Isle of Wight West pointed out, 19 of those children were murdered between 2015 and 2024.

[Apsana Begum]

Does my hon. Friend agree that it is important, following the removal of the presumption of contact, to now launch an expedited parliamentary audit to assess evidence of forced child removals? It something that Right to Equality and the Survivor Family Network have pulled together evidence around and are advocating for.

Violence against Women and Girls

Apsana Begum Excerpts

Thursday 9th January 2025 Commons Chamber

[Apsana Begum (Poplar and Limehouse) (Ind)]

Violence against women and girls is one of the most prevalent and pervasive human rights violations in the world. As an ongoing survivor of domestic abuse and as chair of the all-party parliamentary group on domestic abuse and violence, I know that it can affect women at all stages and in all aspects of their lives. As survivors, we are complex and multifaceted beings, and we are being let down, so I continue to advocate for the need for a multifaceted approach and a comprehensive and cross-departmental strategy that goes beyond criminal justice to social security, housing, employment, health and so on to address perpetrators and empower survivors. A whole-system approach is vital. In the time I have today, I will focus my remarks on the rights of survivors in the workplace.

On Second Reading of the Employment Rights Bill, I raised the point that domestic abuse could have an impact on an individual’s working life through unexplained absences, lateness and negatively impacted performance. For one in 10 survivors, the abuse continues in the workplace, often with their partner turning up at their workplace or stalking them outside their workplace, which is something I know first-hand. The statutory guidance of the Domestic Abuse Act 2021 reminds us how pivotal the role of an employer can be.

Soon after the general election concluded, the APPG on domestic abuse and violence met and discussed how parliamentarians can advocate for the rights of survivors in the workplace. There are calls from organisations, campaigners and Members across the House in that regard, which I will raise now. First is the call for a right for victims of domestic abuse to take leave of absence from work and for regulations to be introduced to give effect to that right, including a minimum of 10 days of paid leave. Survivors may need to take time off work and may not be able to return to work immediately after escaping a perpetrator, for example. They may need time to seek emergency health or housing needs, attend court and so much more.

I draw the House’s attention to the fact that 10 days of paid leave for domestic abuse survivors is a provision available in Northern Ireland. Paid leave measures have also been implemented in other parts of the world, such as New Zealand, the Philippines and some states in the USA. I acknowledge that a handful of organisations in the UK provide paid leave for domestic abuse survivors, but many of us believe that right should be accessible to all survivors, no matter who they work for.

Many of us would also like to see protections for workers from adverse treatment if they are, or are suspected to be a person affected by domestic abuse. That surely must include protections from being dismissed to ensure a survivor’s long-term earning potential is not negatively impacted, as well as ensuring financial independence and freedom from economic abuse in many cases.

My final point on employment rights and domestic abuse survivors is about the work that organisations, campaigns, such as those led by the Employers’ Initiative on Domestic Abuse, and trade unions have done to ensure that employers take all reasonable steps to prevent workers from experiencing domestic abuse. Those steps could include implementing domestic abuse policies in every workplace and ensuring that risk assessments are done for every worker who discloses domestic abuse. That would surely be a progressive next step forward in the struggle to eradicate violence against women and girls from all parts of our society.

The history of challenging violence against women and girls has always had pioneering activism and fighting for social change at its heart. Because of so many survivors around the world, I would never allow my voice to be silenced. The next step is to look at how we support survivors to make sure that no one has to experience abuse in the workplace.

Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation

Apsana Begum Excerpts

Thursday 21st November 2024 Commons Chamber

[Apsana Begum (Poplar and Limehouse) (Ind)]

Democratic and press freedoms are fundamental to our rights. That is why many of us have been campaigning on changing the law to provide meaningful protection against SLAPPs, and I welcome the opportunity the debate offers in that regard. As the re-elected chair of the all-party group on domestic violence and abuse, I want to particularly raise the need to tackle the ability of abusers to weaponise litigation.

I am obliged to highlight a personal interest given my own experiences of lawfare being use against myself. The House will be aware that I was completely cleared and vindicated in Snaresbrook Crown court after what I and many in my constituency and around the UK viewed as vexatious litigation pursued with the purpose of shutting down my public participation as a democratically elected Member of Parliament and as a survivor of domestic abuse. In the end, the local council, where my ex-husband was a councillor at the time, spent more money trying to pursue me in the courts than the amount it alleged it was trying to recoup. I want to place on record that I have never received any recognition, never mind an apology, from the institution and people who did this to me.

Still to this day, I am seeking answers so that something like this cannot ever happen again, because the use of lawfare by abusers to pursue a current or ex-partner is increasingly coming to light. The most common proceedings we see are brought by those accused of sexual and/or domestic violence launching vexatious cases in relation to defamation, libel, misuse of private information, harassment, and press injunctions. However, they can also include the family courts, the criminal justice system and other areas of law. The purpose of these proceedings is to silence, intimidate, discredit and further disempower survivors.

Likewise, there is no doubt in my mind that there is clearly a bias in and pressure on media outlets when reporting on issues relating to domestic abuse and violence against women. To explain what I mean, I need to update the House on the extraordinary situation I continue to face. After I survived a full term as a Member of Parliament facing onslaught after onslaught, my ex-husband was finally expelled from the Labour party for his treatment of me at the beginning of this year. However, that did not stop the relentless attempts to unjustly remove me as an MP by a clique of his associates still in the Labour party. Having survived this, I then had the shock that he then stood against me at the general election as an independent with the stated aim of exposing “who I really was” and getting even with me. On election day itself, my security situation was so serious that I was literally bundled away from polling stations due to the risks. I remember the car he was in driving well over the speed limit past the polling station I was at, and my security support took it on themselves to increase their resources, all the way to the election count and even inside the building.

I am still reeling from what happened, and I am enormously proud of the positive and vibrant campaign I ran despite this situation. I am so moved that the people of Poplar and Limehouse have stood by me. But they are struck, as am I, by how lawfare has been used, albeit unsuccessfully, against me and how my ex-husband’s right to pursue me, including publicly slandering me, seems to be protected. When I continued to raise this with a range of authorities and people, seeking support, I was repeatedly given the impression that very little could be done. And where has this been reported in the media? It is not as though the safety of Members of Parliament has not been of public interest or indeed newsworthy lately. What is it about me that evokes this deadly silence in this regard, and why are women’s experiences of domestic abuse treated so differently?

It might seem strange to some that I raise this while advocating for press freedom, but this is clearly not press freedom, and of course it is obviously connected to the fear of litigious perpetrators and the law around defamation. Indeed, the National Union of Journalists is warning of the current threats to press freedom posed by the use of litigation or indeed the threat of litigation. I have even had contact with journalists from mainstream outlets investigating my situation, who I understand in some cases have even drafted full articles which were then blocked by their editors on what was referred to as “legal grounds.” Yet invariably no such care is taken when it comes to printing smears about me; and what a strange world we live in that accusing me of lying, and indeed all sorts, is not viewed as a damage to my reputation.

Further to this, the growing trend of journalists being targeted directly when receiving threats of legal action instils fear that deters any future journalistic content on an issue. Yet the free expression of survivors sharing their truth is, in my view a matter of public interest that outweighs the private interests and right to reputation of an abuser.

Preventing the misuse of litigation and the use of the law to silence survivors of domestic abuse and violence is central to freedom of speech. The United Nations and others have warned about gendered censorship taking place around the world and that there is clearly imbalance in the system between “his” right to reputation and, usually, “her” right to free speech. As Jennifer Robinson and Keina Yoshida, authors of “How Many More Women?”, succinctly put it:

“Legal change is possible. And fight back we must. Because if we don’t, how many more women will be silenced?”

It is vital that legislators consider this, so that certain types of public interest speech are not privileged over others. It is also vital if we aim to have a future free from perpetrators being able to abuse the courts and pursue litigation in this way, because supporting survivors in speaking out is crucial in envisaging a world where no one is forced to endure domestic abuse. Because at the core of the debate around SLAPPs are questions of democracy, accountability and justice. As I have set out in terms of my own situation, SLAPPs are being used to silence public participation and suppress the provision of information by activists, environmental campaigners, non-governmental organisations, whistleblowers, and even people posting negative product reviews online.

I would like to highlight another example raised with me by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism. Freelance journalist Tom Latchem was investigating a foster care home run by reality show star Ampika Pickston, the fiancée of billionaire owner of West Ham United, David Sullivan. Mr Latchem published a story with the outlet Byline Times about the home having its licence suspended by Ofsted due to reported serious safeguarding failings. I understand, however, that Mr Latchem believes he has been prevented from further reporting on the care home. He wanted in particular to be able to investigate an incident in which Ms Pickston allegedly took a child from the care home to her private residence, but was sent a letter by lawyers for Ms Pickston warning in essence that they would review any published material and if they considered anything to be defamatory or libellous they

“will advise our client to sue both the newspaper and any individual author or journalist for libel, seeking damages and costs”.

I am told that Ms Pickston’s lawyers said their communications with the journalist were “courteous and cordial” and did not prevent him from any reporting. Nevertheless, it will surely be understandable to the House that Mr Latchem feels he cannot afford to face down someone with such resources. It is obvious who loses out if accountability and transparency on the treatment of children in care homes are thwarted.

In conclusion, it is clear that we need a concrete action plan to stop abusive lawsuits silencing those who speak out in the public interest. We only have a hope of stamping out SLAPPs with a comprehensive and robust anti-SLAPP Bill. As such, it would be helpful to hear from the Government whether there is a realistic prospect of that appearing in the next King’s Speech or any other legislative vehicle in this Parliament.

Oral Answers to Questions

Apsana Begum Excerpts

Tuesday 5th November 2024 Commons Chamber

[Alex Davies-Jones]

As the hon. Lady will know, this Government were elected with a landmark mission to halve violence against women and girls over the course of a decade. Every single Department, including the Department for Education, will look at how we tackle misogyny in our schools, streets, homes and workplaces, online, and indeed everywhere. The Opposition have just elected a leader who has made rape jokes previously, but this is about leadership and taking things seriously, and that is exactly what this Government and I are doing. I urge the hon. Lady to write to the Home Office about the specific point that she has made.

[Apsana Begum (Poplar and Limehouse) (Ind)]

As a survivor of domestic abuse—indeed, having endured the experience of my ex-husband standing against me in the recent general election—I have personal and direct experience of the systemic bias against us. Does the Minister agree that we need a comprehensive approach that provides support and consideration at every stage of the criminal justice system; does she agree that that requires funding, not least for specialist support services; and does she agree that we need to address the legal aid crisis as well?

[Alex Davies-Jones]

I thank my hon. Friend for her bravery and for speaking out about her experiences as a victim-survivor, which has undoubtedly helped countless others. She is right that this will take every single Department across Government looking into how we stamp out violence against women and girls in our communities and society. She is also right about funding. We are currently looking through the funding we received at the Budget, and in due course I will be able to outline how we will support services. If she would like me to meet her to discuss this further, I shall be happy to do so.