Family courts show widespread gender bias and victim-blaming, report finds
A report says 72.5% of 91 family court judgments in England and Wales contained victim-blaming, often aimed at mothers.
Intelligence analysis by GPT-5.4 Mini
A nonprofit analysis of published family court judgments says victim-blaming and gender bias are widespread in England and Wales, with mothers scrutinised more harshly than fathers. The report is being taken to MPs, alongside calls for more transparency, mandatory training, and possible AI tools to spot bias.
The report says some family court judges in England and Wales may be blaming women unfairly, like playing a game where one side is judged much harder than the other. It wants more training, more published decisions, and tools to spot unfair thinking.
Analysis
What the report says
Right to Equality reviewed 91 published family law judgments in England and Wales and says it found “widespread and concerning evidence” of victim-blaming language and gender bias. According to the report, 72.5% of the judgments contained at least one instance of judicial victim-blaming, with 66 judgments containing such language and 530 instances overall.
The group says mothers were often treated more harshly than fathers. In its view, mothers’ actions were closely examined while fathers’ conduct was more often put into context or softened. The authors say that pattern raises concern that harmful assumptions may be affecting judicial decision-making, including reliance on rape myths, stereotypes, or scepticism toward mothers.
Voices from the article
Two women described feeling that the court system treated them differently because they were women, and that their ex-partners faced far less scrutiny. One said her former partner was allowed to mock proceedings without being held to account, while another said the “whole culture is victim-blaming” and that judges are effectively left to mark their own work without enough feedback or learning.
What the report wants changed
The report recommends publishing 20% of family judiciary judgments each month, with specific targets for cases where domestic and sexual abuse are raised. It also calls for mandatory training on gender bias and victim-blaming. A further recommendation is to explore AI tools that could help identify biased language in family court decisions.
Dr Charlotte Proudman, a co-director of Right to Equality, said the report reflects what survivors have been saying for years: that bias is embedded in the family justice system and can shape decisions affecting children’s safety. MP Kirith Entwistle, who is backing the launch, said too many women describe family courts as an extension of the abuse they were trying to escape.
Key points
- Right to Equality reviewed 91 published family law judgments in England and Wales.
- It says 72.5% of the judgments included at least one instance of victim-blaming.
- The report says mothers were scrutinised more intensely than fathers.
- It recommends publishing more judgments, mandatory bias training, and exploring AI tools to detect bias.
- MP Kirith Entwistle is supporting the report and its launch in parliament.
If the report prompts reform, family courts could become more transparent and more consistent in how they handle abuse claims. Better training and more published judgments could help judges spot harmful assumptions and improve trust among survivors.
If nothing changes, the report suggests biased language and attitudes could keep affecting decisions about children and abuse. That could leave survivors feeling unsafe in court and deepen public distrust in the family justice system.
