'It is effectively silencing women': Calls to reform in-camera rule in family law

Senior policy co-ordinator with the National Women’s Council Ivanna Youtchak said there is no consistency across the country on how the in-camera rule is implemented. File picture

Behind closed doors in rooms across the country, victims of domestic abuse are engaged in ongoing battles of wit with their partner or former partner.

Also behind those closed doors, judges and lawyers are trying to untangle the same conflicts, as devastated parents fight for their children amid relationships shattered by coercion, fear, and dominance.

Hundreds of women across the country have united behind a campaign set up by barrister Lisa Ann Wilkinson and Síle Ní Dhubhghaill to fight for changes to the family law system.

Ms Wilkinson says that the campaign manifesto is being unveiled ahead of International Women’s Day on Sunday, March 8, with priorities including reform of the in-camera rule and regulation of assessors providing reports for family law cases.

There are also concerns that perpetrators of domestic violence are able to obtain custody or access to their children despite their abuse.

She said: “It is a modern Magdalene laundry but nobody can talk about it because everyone is restricted by the in-camera rule.”

Family law cases are bound by the in-camera rule, meaning that such legal proceedings are held in private. A family law reporting project is underway in family courts across the country in a bid to improve transparency of the system.

Ms Wilkinson said: “The in-camera rule and the use of unregulated assessors determining and making recommendations for the child on which parent they should be with have to be changed.

The assessors are not domestic violence-informed and all victims and survivors in my group are negatively affected by these assessments — and that is me talking to 380 women in the last three months.

Officials from the Department of Justice are also examining proposals in a report published last May on how the in-camera system can be reformed.

Women’s Aid chief executive Sarah Benson says the organisation is concerned that “nine months after the publication of the long-awaited report, we don’t have a clear articulation of the department’s plans to progress action on the recommendations”.

She said: “The family law system urgently needs action in relation to the in-camera law to better balance confidentiality against secrecy and privacy with transparency. The report sets out some important starting points that we would like to see progress on.”

Senior policy co-ordinator with the National Women’s Council Ivanna Youtchak said there is no consistency across the country on how the in-camera rule is implemented.

“It can be used loosely and discretionarily. Judges use it in many different forms and many different understandings. It could mean, for example, that a mother might not even be left tell their child’s school something.”

She added: “There seems to be an agreement that it needs to be changed but we have had no further action and victims are still in limbo with this. Anything they do can be subject to the in-camera rule. Victims are incredibly scared.

“It is effectively silencing women. They can’t speak openly about their cases.”

Jennie’s Law

Last September, the Cabinet gave approval for the establishment of a domestic violence register under legislation which has become known as Jennie’s Law. It is named after Jennifer Poole, who was murdered by her former partner Gavin Murphy in 2021.

Victims will be required to provide consent before the convicted abuser can be named on the public register, which will be managed by the Courts Service. Names will remain on the register for three years, with the possibility of removal upon request. Legislation for the register underwent pre-legislative scrutiny in recent weeks.

Marie Louise Lynch of Survivors Informing Services and Institutions (SISI) is concerned that the link between domestic violence and the secrecy enshrouding family law will impact the effectiveness of the register.

She says: “With Jennie’s Law, the victim has to want the perpetrator’s name on the register but when family law proceedings are ongoing, she will more often than not say she doesn’t want his name on a public register so as to protect the children — not understanding that his behaviour won’t stop but his tactics will change.

“It could be many years after his conviction for breach of a domestic violence order that criminalises the domestic violence before she realises he isn’t going to stop and that if she could go back in time, she would have put his name on the register.”

Ms Lynch also says that three years on a register is not enough time to warn a future partner about the history of domestic violence of an offender — “and it is not enough to protect the mother of children stuck in the middle of on-going family law proceedings”.

Ms Lynch points out that more than 12,000 applications for domestic violence orders are made each year, the vast majority by women.

We are sending women into the family law courts for protection. But where coercive control is present, an application is made by the perpetrator for access.

This is followed, she said, by an application for a Section 32 child welfare report, which can be “weaponised against the mother”.

In family law cases where children are involved, a judge can order that a welfare report on the child or children is carried out. It is typically done by child psychologists, although other experts can be appointed by the court, and they may include recommendations to the court regarding issues such as custody or access.

There is concern about the lack of regulation of psychologists, psychotherapists, and counsellors doing the reports. This is being addressed by Coru, the body responsible for the regulation of health and social care professionals, according to health minister Jennifer Carroll MacNeill.

Ms Ní Dhubhghaill said the current system allows people who provide assessment reports for the courts to do so without any training in domestic violence. She also claims that some assessors are promoting the concept of parental alienation, a controversial idea within family law.

Parental alienation is typically used to describe a situation where one parent wrongfully influences a child or children to turn against the other parent, usually in situations of relationship breakdown.

While some see parental alienation as a type of abuse of children by alienating them from one parent (usually the father), others see it as a tool used in the family law courts to silence women coming from a domestic violence setting.

Last June, Dafna Hacker Dror of the UN’s committee on the elimination of discrimination against women and girls, raised concerns that “formal bodies (in Ireland) are using the concept of parental alienation as if not contested, while it is highly contested on many levels including due to the risk that use of this concept holds for women and children who suffer from domestic violence.”

What's your view on this issue?

You can tell us here

It was the subject of a consultation process launched in 2022 by the then justice minister Helen McEntee and the findings of that process highlighted areas to be addressed, including examining how welfare reports are conducted, what they contain, and how assessors are appointed.

Ms Ní Dhubhghaill said: “There is a big pushback against the concept in the UK”.

Mary-Louise Lynch points to another notable development in Britain.

Last October, the government announced a repeal of a law which guided the family court to presume that contact with both parents is usually in the best interests of a child.

It resulted from campaigning by a mother whose two sons were killed by their father in a house fire which also killed himself. He had been granted access to his children for five hours a week, despite evidence that he had previously threatened to kill them and himself.

Ms Lynch said: “I am not sure that we can actually do that in Ireland without another referendum.”

The Department of Justice said in a statement: “An independent research report was published on the operation of the in-camera rule in May 2025.

The report contains 21 recommendations. These include the need to retitle the rule to ensure its purpose is understood by all family court users; that it is clearly and consistently defined; and that its operation does not impede parties accessing support outside court.

“A number of the recommendations also related to the promotion of greater transparency, while ensuring that the privacy of those seeking the court’s help, as well as any children about whom proceedings relate, is protected.

“Officials from the department are currently considering the findings and recommendations of the report.

“This includes the consideration of any legislative change possibly required. This detailed work is ongoing, and policy proposals for reform will be submitted to the minister for consideration when finalised.”

It stated that any proposals would need to ensure the privacy of parties in family law continues.

“At the same time, such proposals will also consider how clarity can be provided regarding the scope of the rule and its impact for those involved in proceedings and enhance understanding of family law proceedings across society.”