Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Deputy for raising this issue. She placed particular emphasis on domestic violence against children as opposed to domestic violence against spouses. Violence against children by parents is an aspect of child abuse within the home. A feature of the spectrum of domestic violence is that spouses perpetrate violence against each other. More frequent is violence by the husband against the wife, but there have been instances over the years of wives being violent against husbands. Frequently, children are caught in the middle where there is domestic violence. We should never simplify this area. There are spouses who are violent towards each other but who are never violent towards their children. However, children suffer severe psychological trauma and damage when they witness parents being violent against each other, or one parent perpetrating violence against the other. Equally, there are parents who are physically violent towards their children. This is of particular concern and it arises frequently in the family courts when dealing with proceedings taken by parents who are separating spouses or separated partners. Those proceedings were taken under the Guardianship of Infants Act 1964. Under our statutory provisions, the welfare of the child is the paramount consideration in making decisions about the custody of or access to a child. As the Deputy stated, that protection is now enhanced by the constitutional amendment on children's rights, which seeks to ensure that, in dealing with guardianship, custody and access cases, the best interests of the child constitutionally will be regarded as the paramount consideration.

It was my concern for some time prior to my becoming Minister that the courts did not have the back-up required in undertaking child assessments where allegations are made. My experience as a family lawyer over the years demonstrates that allegations of violence against a child by one parent against the other are not always true. Sometimes they are used as a weapon in a marital battle to try to prevent an appropriate parent from having contact with children.

In July of this year, I announced we would proceed to have a constitutional referendum to facilitate the establishment of new court systems, including family court systems. One reason is that we need to move away from the current court structure. We need a unified and integrated family court structure with judges with expertise in this area and with the appropriate back-up assessment services. The Deputy is correct to say there is a financial cost involved in this. Some 20 years ago, when the probation service was called the probation and welfare service, the welfare side of the service was used in family disputes in the District Court to undertake child assessments to assist the judge in reaching decisions. Some considerable years ago, that role was removed from the probation and welfare service, which is now essentially a probation service. I have no doubt there is a need, in appropriate cases, for such assessments to be carried out. There is a need for the courts to listen to what children have to say. The amendment made to the Constitution on Saturday – the votes were counted on Sunday – gives a voice to the child. It is important that the courts, considering children's age and level of understanding, take cognisance of what they say.

In dealing with allegations of violence, it is terribly important that the courts be informed, not just in child protection cases but also in disputes relating to custody and access. It is also important that false allegations not be used to prevent a child from having a right of contact with parents who can no longer live with each other. I assure the Deputy that these are all issues in which I have had considerable interest for some substantial time. The court system and assessment issues will be part and parcel of the reforms we hope to introduce, on condition that we have a successful referendum on the courts issue.

See this speech in context