.jpg)
It’s one of the hardest positions to be in. You’ve experienced family violence, maybe for years, but now you’re in court, and there’s no police charge, no photos, no witnesses. Just your word, and you’re terrified it won’t be enough.
You’re not alone. Many people, especially survivors, fear that without formal “proof,” their story will be dismissed. But in reality, Australian family law doesn’t require police involvement or outside evidence to take allegations seriously.
Yes. And it’s not just a technicality, it’s a legal and ethical obligation.
The Full Court in Salah & Salah [2016] made it clear: family violence often happens in private. Behind closed doors. That doesn’t make it any less real. Judges must not disregard someone’s account simply because it can’t be independently confirmed or tested at an early stage.
So even if your former partner has never been charged, the court can still consider your allegations when making parenting orders, especially when children’s safety is at stake. Interim hearings in particular focus on risk, not final proof. And risk can come from patterns of behaviour that don’t leave bruises.
If needed, the court may issue interim or interlocutory orders while things are being investigated more thoroughly.
That happens. Often.
Sometimes it’s flat-out denial. Other times it’s minimising like "It was just one argument" or "I was stressed." And when there’s no supporting documentation, it can feel like your word is pitted against theirs.
But family courts are designed to handle these kinds of disputes. The Full Court in SS v AH [2010] acknowledged that judges will sometimes be left with competing accounts and no way to verify them immediately. In those moments, the court has to weigh up what’s more probable, and what outcomes could harm the children most if the wrong call is made.
In practice, this often means leaning on caution. That’s especially true where the allegations point to a risk of emotional harm, intimidation, or coercive control, things that can deeply affect a child even if they weren’t the direct target.
Family violence isn’t always visible. And the law reflects that.
Under section 4AB of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), family violence includes a broad range of behaviours, not just physical assault. The definition recognises emotional abuse, threats, financial control, and other coercive tactics as serious concerns in parenting matters.
So if you’ve experienced emotional abuse or coercive behaviour but don’t have a medical report or police record, that doesn’t invalidate what happened. These experiences can still shape the court’s view of what’s safe and appropriate when it comes to parenting time or communication between parties.
In many cases, it helps to create some breathing space. If ongoing contact with the other parent feels unsafe, legally formalising arrangements through consent orders may be a practical next step, especially if you both want to avoid further escalation but can’t agree informally.
Allegations don’t only come from one side. You might be reading this because you’ve been accused, and you don’t agree with how the situation’s being described.
It’s confronting. Especially if the claims feel exaggerated or designed to influence court decisions.
But here’s what matters: the court doesn’t take allegations at face value. Even in interim proceedings, you’ll have the chance to respond through your affidavit. And if the matter goes to a final hearing, both sides’ evidence can be tested by cross-examination, independent family assessments, or expert reports.
It’s worth knowing that how you engage in this process matters. Staying respectful, consistent, and focused on the child’s well-being can carry significant weight, sometimes more than trying to “win” the narrative. The court sees through performance. It looks for patterns.
If you're scared the court won’t believe you because there’s no formal record of what you went through, breathe. That fear is valid, but it’s not a deal-breaker.
You don’t need a police file to be heard. What you do need is clarity: a timeline of events, a description of how the behaviour affected you and your children, and (where possible) small forms of corroboration like using texts, journal entries, witness observations, even photos that suggest emotional or environmental shifts.
And sometimes, it’s not just about parenting. If violence or control affected your financial independence, your access to support, or your ability to work, the impact may also be relevant in property settlement proceedings. The law doesn’t ignore context.
Yes, but not lightly.
If new concerns have emerged after final parenting orders were made, you may be able to apply to vary them. The court won’t revisit parenting orders without a significant reason, but if safety concerns are recent or were not known at the time of the original hearing, there’s scope for reconsideration. The threshold comes from the decision in Rice & Asplund (1979), FLC 90-725, which requires a material change in circumstances, such as new safety risks or behavioural changes by a parent, before the court will consider re-opening final parenting orders.
Here’s what’s often missed: just because no one else saw it doesn’t mean it didn’t happen.
The court understands this. It knows that family violence can be subtle, insidious, and private. It doesn’t require you to have a perfect case, only a credible one.
And that applies no matter which side of the allegation you’re on. Whether you’re trying to protect yourself and your children or trying to navigate claims you believe are unfair, the process is designed to find a path forward that keeps everyone, especially the children, safe and supported.
If you’re standing at the edge of a legal process that feels overwhelming, you don’t have to figure it out alone. Reach out to Hillcrest Family Lawyers. We’ll meet you where you are with calm, clarity, and a plan that puts your voice back in the room.
