Domestic Abuse: Children

Helen Hayes Excerpts

Thursday 27th November 2025 Westminster Hall

[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.

--- Later in debate ---

[Helen Hayes]

My hon. Friend raises an important issue. I hope that the Minister will be able to respond to that in her remarks.

We have a children’s social care system, and the tragic case of Sara Sharif—which the hon. Member for Woking (Mr Forster) spoke very powerfully about—is an important case in point where the arrangements that should be in place to protect children, decide the right outcome for them and provide an environment in which they can be safe too often fail to do that. That speaks to the need for reform. The removal of the presumption of contact puts children’s experiences, their voices and safety, back at the heart of contact decisions, where they should always have been.

I want to turn to the question of support for children who have experienced domestic abuse. Research by Women’s Aid found that 70% of children said that they would seek help in a situation of domestic abuse, but that 61% did not know where to go to find any help. The Domestic Abuse Commissioner also found that fewer than a third of victims and survivors of abuse who wanted support for their own children were able to get it—so more than two thirds were unable to access that support. Setting that against the very significant funding pressures experienced by both domestic abuse support services and children’s social care, it is clear that access to support is not currently adequate.

I am particularly concerned to read Women’s Aid’s findings from its 2025 annual audit that the proportion of organisations running children and young people’s domestic abuse services in the community without dedicated funding doubled from 15.7% to 31.4% this year. There are always costs to failing to meet the needs of children. The costs of children not being able to access support to recover from domestic abuse are seen in ongoing harm to victims and also in additional need for health services, because people who have experienced domestic abuse as children have higher mental and physical health needs, especially if they are not supported.

I welcome the Government’s commitment to ensure that the views of child victims of domestic abuse are considered when developing policy and designing services, but it is important that that translates into changes that increase awareness of abuse among children, make it easier to disclose abuse and seek help, and which make support more readily available so that children can recover.

Finally, it is important that we focus on not only what happens when abuse occurs, but how we reduce incidents of abuse in the first place. The Education Committee has emphasised the need to improve early intervention by strengthening and increasing funding for the Families First partnership. We welcome the announcement of increased funding this week. I also welcome the Government’s commitment to improve how children learn about healthy relationships at school through relationships, sex and health education and the commitment to tackle misogyny in schools. That requires tackling the pernicious information that young people are accessing online and equipping them with the skills and values to challenge such information among their peers. I hope that the Minister can set out today some further information on how those commitments will be implemented.

Tackling this issue and ensuring that every child grows up knowing how to keep themselves safe and with a good understanding of what makes for a healthy relationship, along with the ability to spot when that is not happening around them, and the ability to access help and support when they need it is a vital part of creating a country where every child can thrive.

[Christine Jardine (in the Chair)]

I remind Members that if we are going to get everyone in, please keep to five minutes.

Child Arrangements: Presumption of Parental Involvement

Helen Hayes Excerpts

Wednesday 22nd January 2025 Westminster Hall

[Dr Tidball]

I absolutely do agree and will return to my proposals for reform later.

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

My hon. Friend is making an immensely powerful speech. It was extremely moving yesterday for the Education Committee to hear directly from my hon. Friend’s constituent, Claire Throssell. Claire’s work, in the context of her unbearably painful experience, is deeply inspiring, and I pay tribute to her.

We heard from her how problems in the family courts, including but not limited to the presumption of contact, have knock-on consequences for the wider work of child protection. Will my hon. Friend join me in calling on the Minister to ensure that there is strong, joined-up and effective working between her Department and the Department for Education so that we make sure that everyone who has a role in the protection of children is doing the most effective work possible?

[Dr Tidball]

I agree. We have said that we will take a mission-centred approach in Government, particularly to halve violence against women and girls, and I will return to that point. As a reference for Hansard, I mention that Claire Throssell MBE is with us in this Chamber today.

Violence Reduction, Policing and Criminal Justice

Helen Hayes Excerpts

Wednesday 15th November 2023 Commons Chamber

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

I will address two issues in my response to the King’s Speech, both of which relate to violence.

In my constituency, we have lost far too many young lives to serious violence, including, since the start of September, Ronaldo Scott and Keelen Morris Wong. Both were brutally murdered in broad daylight with huge knives of the kind known as “Rambo knives” or “zombie knives.” They both leave a community of family, friends and neighbours utterly devastated.

Our communities are playing their part, with support from our local councils and the Mayor of London, in tackling the complex problem of serious violence, but the Government have not been playing their part. A ban on Rambo and zombie knives was promised in 2016, but in response to my recent written question, the Minister said that it would be done “when parliamentary time allows.” The King’s Speech is the moment in our calendar when the Government set out how they will allocate parliamentary time, so I am dismayed that it contains no specific mention of a ban on the largest and most brutal of knives. No one has a legitimate need for a hunting knife in London. By failing to bring forward the ban, the Government are signalling that they simply do not care about the violence being perpetrated in constituencies such as mine.

The second issue I will address is the horror that we are witnessing in Israel and Gaza. The terror attack perpetrated by Hamas on 7 October was an unspeakable violation, the largest slaughter of Jewish people since the holocaust, and the largest terror attack since 9/11. We stand in solidarity with all those affected: the injured, the hostages and the families who are bereaved or desperately worried about loved ones held captive in Gaza. Israel has the right to defend itself—as would any country in the face of such an horrific attack—but that right is not without limit. It is constrained by international law, which protects civilians, critical infrastructure such as hospitals, and critical supplies such as food, water, medicines and energy.

We have witnessed a month of unrelenting bombardment of Gaza. More than 11,000 people have been killed, homes and whole neighbourhoods have been destroyed, hospitals have been left unable to function, and a whole population is being denied access to food, water, energy and medicines. We cannot look at the horror and suffering on our TV screens and conclude that the scale of destruction we are witnessing is proportionate, or that denying aid from entering Gaza is within international law. Again, we must stand in solidarity with all those affected: the injured, the families who are bereaved and those desperately worried about their loved ones in Gaza.

I have heard from thousands of my constituents who have been in contact with me over the past month to share their views. They, too, are completely horrified by what they are seeing, and they want every possible effort to be made to stop the conflict. They understand that that is what is signalled by the word “ceasefire.”

In calling for a ceasefire, no one is suggesting that the cessation should be unilateral or without conditions: Hamas must release the hostages. In war, ceasefires do not always hold, and we must all be realistic about the intensity of this conflict, but a bilateral humanitarian cessation of the violence—a ceasefire—is surely the minimum we should be demanding in the face of such horrific suffering. This is not a minority view, but the view of Oxfam, Medical Aid for Palestinians, Islamic Relief, the Red Crescent, Christian Aid, and all of the major aid agencies with a presence in the region. It is the view of the United Nations and all of its aid agencies. It is the view of our former colleague in this place, David Miliband, as well as of President Macron, the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Pope.

On this issue, the overwhelming, prevailing view of my constituents is that where we have an opportunity to call for an end to the horrific suffering in Gaza, we must do so. “Ceasefire” is the word that they understand to mean an end to that horrific suffering.

[Matt Western (Warwick and Leamington) (Lab)]

My hon. Friend is making an incredibly powerful speech, and I am sure my constituents feel very similarly to hers. I think we all want to see a ceasefire—a cessation of hostilities—and we need to have the steps to bring that about. However, does my hon. Friend agree that we need to see not only the release of hostages, but an agreement between these two warring factions and the release of prisoners from the other side?

[Helen Hayes]

I thank my hon. Friend for his intervention, and he is right. This process is not easy—nobody is saying that it is—but my conscience tells me that calling for a ceasefire is the right thing to do. That is not a unilateral laying-down of arms, but a bilateral humanitarian ceasefire predicated on the release of hostages and leading to an internationally brokered peace process and a two-state solution, with a secure Israel living alongside a sovereign, viable Palestine.

I fully understand that colleagues will have different views from those of their constituents, and there is no easy response to this appalling conflict. We must all treat each other with respect at this time, but we must all be able to stand in front of our own constituents with integrity, and at peace with our own consciences on the issues that matter most to them. My conscience tells me that I must call for a ceasefire today—a halt to this dreadful destruction and conflict. Far too many have already died on both sides, and more will continue to die if the violence does not cease. We must call for a ceasefire.

Oral Answers to Questions

Helen Hayes Excerpts

Tuesday 27th June 2023 Commons Chamber

[Mike Freer]

The change in sentencing powers was no reflection on the magistrates, whose work is highly valued. The Department continues to keep the sentencing powers under review. I give my hon. Friend the commitment that the issues raised in that meeting with his local bench are being progressed through the Department

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

T7. A constituent who is a victim of domestic abuse recently attended court for the trial of her abuser. An officer from the Crown Prosecution Service told her that they did not know whether the case would be called that day; that if it was not, they did not know when it would be called; and that if she dropped the charges, the CPS would arrange a lifetime injunction preventing her abuser from contacting her. An injunction might afford my constituent some protection, but it would not deliver justice or prevent other women from being attacked by the same abuser. Will the Secretary of State investigate such unacceptable practices, which seek to reduce backlogs by persuading victims to withdraw from their right to the justice that they deserve?

[Alex Chalk]

The hon. Lady is absolutely right that people should have the opportunity to see justice done, and justice is done not simply by getting an injunction—important though that may be—but by ensuring that an abuser hears the clang of the prison gate in appropriate circumstances and if that is what the court orders. I do not know specifically what happened in that case, but I can say that, under the victims code, individuals have the opportunity to raise issues with the CPS. Supposing that they were seeking to drop a case, there is now a victim’s right to review—to say to the CPS, “Look again at this.” Equally, there is the opportunity for court familiarisation visits or special measures applications. That is all about ensuring that, where they want to, victims have their day in court and see justice done.

Oral Answers to Questions

Helen Hayes Excerpts

Tuesday 18th October 2022 Commons Chamber

[Kate Osborne (Jarrow) (Lab)]

2. What steps his Department is taking to reform the criminal justice system to help tackle violence against women and girls.

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

12. What steps his Department is taking to reform the criminal justice system to help tackle violence against women and girls.

[The Minister of State, Ministry of Justice (Rachel Maclean)]

Since we published the end-to-end rape review, rape convictions have increased by 77% in the past year, and they are up by 30% on pre-pandemic levels. But there is much more to do, which is why, among other measures, we are more than quadrupling funding for victim support, to £192 million, and investing in increasing the number of independent sexual and domestic abuse advisers to 1,000 by 2024-25.

--- Later in debate ---

[Rachel Maclean]

I thank the hon. Lady for her remarks; I have two observations on what she said. First, she talks about the Met police. The Labour Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, is the police and crime commissioner for the London police forces. I also ask her to direct her questions to the Home Office, which leads on these matters. Of course, we will play our part, which is why we are rolling out all the measures in the Crown courts to protect victims of sexual assault and rape, and there is a lot more to do.

[Helen Hayes]

Under this Conservative Government, people can be fined for cycling on the pavement but not for following a girl walking home from school. The problem is so widespread that research by Plan International revealed that one third of all schoolgirls have received unwanted sexual attention in their school uniform. For so many women, a lifetime of feeling unsafe on our streets starts in childhood. The Government continue to ignore the problem. Does the Minister agree that the law must be changed to criminalise street harassment?

Rape and Sexual Violence

Helen Hayes Excerpts

Tuesday 8th March 2022 Commons Chamber

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

I rise to speak in this important debate on behalf of women and girls in Dulwich and West Norwood who have little confidence that the Government, the police and the courts are there to protect them. The shocking failure to prosecute the horrific offence of rape is one of the clearest manifestations of the ways in which this Government are failing women and girls. A woman can be raped, and in less than 2% of cases will the perpetrator face any consequences. It might as well be legal.

Women and girls see a terrible continuum from the casual, everyday street harassment that they experience, to the culture of sexual harassment in schools exposed so clearly by the Everyone’s Invited campaign, to the horrific murders that have reached the headlines in recent months: of Sarah Everard, Bibaa Henry, Nicole Smallman and Sabina Nessa, and of the many more whose names we do not know—women going about their daily lives, walking home, celebrating a birthday or meeting a friend for a drink on a Friday night.

Again and again, the Government have responded with warm words but the action has fallen short. They have said that they will create a new offence of sexual harassment in a public place if there is evidence that it is needed. I am not sure what additional evidence the Government need than the millions of women up and down the country who rose up a year ago to say that street harassment blights their lives and makes them feel unsafe in their own neighbourhoods and town centres. The promised legislation to criminalise curb crawling has failed to materialise. There has been no meaningful follow up response to the Everyone’s Invited revelations.

Women look at the reality of the framework of protection on which they should be able to rely, and they see story after story of police officers behaving in ways that are as bad as the offenders whom they are supposed to apprehend—sharing pictures of murdered women on a WhatsApp group, making advances as they report sexual harassment, being charged with and convicted of rape, and, most shockingly of all, using a warrant card to facilitate rape and murder. Yet there is still no statutory inquiry into the culture of misogyny in the police, and no commitment to culture change.

The courts are no better. I spoke recently with a constituent who is the victim of horrific domestic abuse. She told me that the central London family court is so clogged up that no one ever answers the phone. The Government must urgently act to give women and girls confidence that they are safe at home, on our streets and in public spaces; that if they are the victim of any type of misogyny, from curb crawling to street harassment to rape, they will be listened to and believed; and that the offence will be investigated, evidence gathered and everything possible done to bring a successful prosecution so that perpetrators are always held to account.

Delivering this change requires much more than simply a change of management approach at the Crown Prosecution Service. It requires a wholesale change in the culture of policing and the practices of the criminal justice system. It also requires a much greater commitment to prevention, particularly in educating boys and young men on respect and consent.

Finally, today is International Women’s Day, and as we debate the shamefully poor rape prosecution rate in this country, we must also stand in solidarity with women and girls in other parts of the world. I want to mention in particular women in Ethiopia, who over the past 18 months have been subjected to an horrific conflict, which has seen the routine and systematic use of rape as a weapon of war. The British Government must do everything possible to end the use of sexual violence in conflict, working through the UN and providing humanitarian and trauma support to victims. They can do that most effectively from a position of strength at home. The Government must show that rape is a heinous offence and that perpetrators must always be held to account by getting their own house in order and leading by example.

As a mother of two teenage girls, I reflect on how I always tell them as they leave home in the morning to “stay safe” as if that is somehow solely their responsibility. It is not. We cannot tolerate any longer a society in which women and girls are subjected to harassment on a daily basis, far too often escalating into abuse and rape, and in which the institutions and systems that should be there to protect them fail so dismally to do so.

Domestic Abuse Bill

Helen Hayes Excerpts

Wednesday 2nd October 2019 Commons Chamber

[Robert Buckland]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend, who is right to remind us at the get-go of the importance of a co-ordinated approach. All of us, including Members of Parliament, need to be domestic abuse-aware. We need to understand that it presents in myriad ways and myriad circumstances.

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

Domestic abuse is a leading cause of homelessness, and some of the most harrowing cases I have dealt with as a constituency MP have involved the difficulty faced by survivors of abuse in accessing safe, secure housing. Will the Secretary of State undertake to ensure in the Bill that survivors of domestic abuse automatically have priority need status for housing and, most importantly, that local authorities are fully and sustainably funded to deliver that obligation?

[Robert Buckland]

I am grateful to the hon. Lady for raising that issue, and the Bill provides an opportunity to delve into it. It is important that we outline those principles on Second Reading. In Committee, we will have an opportunity to debate the detail. I am particularly interested in the points that she made. I want to make the Bill as good as possible, and I need the help not just of colleagues in government but of all hon. Members to do that.

Children’s Funeral Fund

Helen Hayes Excerpts

Wednesday 1st May 2019 Commons Chamber

[Edward Argar]

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman. He is right that we can draw on the lessons from the devolved Administrations, and I will touch on that subsequently. However, there are different arrangements in, for example, Wales around the provision of coffins. I agree with the hon. Member for Swansea East that that is an essential part of this. We are looking to see if we can bring that within the scheme in a way different from that used in Wales. There are differences, and there is also a different legislative context given the devolution settlement—I will touch on that in a minute.

I entirely accept that for those dealing with the terrible burden of bereavement, progress has been slow. I want to reassure the House that, as the Prime Minister announced in the House on 27 February, work is on track in each of the areas I mentioned: a clear policy, a legislative vehicle to ensure that it is legal, and a strong and robust delivery mechanism to deliver the fund this summer.

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

I pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Swansea East (Carolyn Harris) for the work that she has done in this area, which is really second to none. In November last year, I sat in the living room of one of my constituents as she lay on her sofa stricken by grief having lost her 16-year-old son to knife crime. Her grief was compounded by the family’s inability to pay for the funeral that she wanted to give her son. Will the Minister accept that with every passing week, there is more urgency to this issue and to delivering this money so that it can benefit families who are facing a situation than none of us would wish on anyone?

[Edward Argar]

I want to give at this Dispatch Box a very clear and succinct answer: I agree entirely with the point that the hon. Lady makes. I will come on in a moment to what I have been doing to take a close and personal interest in making sure that this is driven at pace.

Oral Answers to Questions

Helen Hayes Excerpts

Tuesday 5th February 2019 Commons Chamber

[Rory Stewart]

As a former Minister in the Department for International Development, I assure the hon. Gentleman that we remain open to that. We have recently faced problems in Jamaica because there has been political resistance, not from us but from the Jamaican Government, to British development money being used in that way. We remain open to investment in the rule of law, and if it helps us to return foreign national offenders, at the same time as helping prisoners in that country, we will do that.

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

8. What assessment he has made of the effect of recent (a) changes in court staffing and (b) court closures on access to justice.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice (Lucy Frazer)]

I assure the hon. Lady that any decision to close a court is taken incredibly carefully, but in circumstances in which 41% of courts were operating at half their available capacity in 2016-17, it is right that the Ministry of Justice considers how best to spend its resources. We are investing £1 billion in our courts, bringing them up to date, improving back-office systems and making it easier for people to access justice.

[Helen Hayes]

Three years ago, I expressed concerns about the impact that the closure of Lambeth county court would have on the efficiency of the court system and access to justice for my constituents. Lambeth was closed two years ago and the workload was moved to Clerkenwell and Shoreditch. Yesterday, I heard from a local legal aid solicitor that Clerkenwell and Shoreditch county court is completely overwhelmed, that delays of six to eight months to receive court directions are common, and that the contact centre cannot provide up-to-date information on cases. When will the Government act to sort out this shambolic mess?

[Lucy Frazer]

I am happy to meet the hon. Lady to discuss that specific situation. The MOJ is taking a number of steps to improve court timeliness, which is of course important. We are digitising a number of services—people can now track their tribunal appeal online—and recruiting more judges to tribunals, with more than 225 recruited over the past year. I am happy to discuss that particular case.

Oral Answers to Questions

Helen Hayes Excerpts

Tuesday 6th March 2018 Commons Chamber

[Ruth George (High Peak) (Lab)]

1. What recent assessment his Department has made of the effect of court closures on access to justice.

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

2. What recent assessment his Department has made of the effect of court closures on access to justice.

[The Secretary of State for Justice and Lord Chancellor (Mr David Gauke)]

Maintaining access to justice is a key principle when changes to the estate are proposed. Before issuing our consultation on court closures in January, we assessed the impact on access to justice—principally, the changes in travel time for court users. The decision to close a court is never taken lightly, and is made only after full public consultation and where we are satisfied that access to justice is maintained. Our reform programme will improve access to justice for many users, while allowing many needs to be met without the need to attend court. Online solutions and video hearings will make access to justice easier.

--- Later in debate ---

[Helen Hayes]

I have been raising concerns about the closure of Lambeth county court for the past two years, and the court finally closed in December. My constituents facing the repossession of their homes must now attend Clerkenwell county court, which lawyers report to be a chaotic environment, which is impossible to contact by telephone, where cases and files frequently go missing and where the number of respondents failing to attend is rocketing. When will the Justice Secretary take action to address this unacceptable situation?

[Mr Gauke]

The reality is that we are undertaking a series of reforms, making much greater use of digital technology and increasing access to online ways of dealing with this. This is an important modernisation that the courts system needs.