Search

As the psychological impact of childhood exposure to domestic abuse gains more traction, referring to children as 'the hidden victims of domestic abuse' is becoming increasingly inaccurate and reductionist. Representing children as mere witnesses of domestic abuse also poses wider implications from the view of law and policy. Jurisdictions which recognise children as direct victims rather than hidden witnesses of domestic abuse, for example, send a clear message that the psychological harm of experiencing domestic abuse merits robust intervention (e.g. additional funding for child-specific support and services). Using a comparative approach, this study analyses the legal recognition of children who experience domestic abuse for the purposes of exploring how the child should be conceptualised in laws regulating childhood exposure to domestic abuse. For this comparative review, the jurisdictions of England and Wales, New Zealand and the United States (specifically the State of Washington) were selected, on the basis that they all respond to child experiences of domestic abuse in distinct ways that raise pertinent points of contrast. Whilst the State of Washington relies primarily on perpetrator-centric, criminal law responses to child experiences of domestic abuse, England and Wales and New Zealand resort to family law mechanisms that focus more on the child and the parent–child relationship. All in all, these points of contrast are pertinent because they provide an exploratory view of how the child should be conceptualised in law and policy. As this paper submits, conceptualising the child as a direct victim of domestic abuse––as reflected in England and Wales and New Zealand's legislative efforts––works to send a powerful message about the severity of harm that children suffer when they experience domestic abuse. The State of Washington, on the other hand, has much to learn from England and Wales and New Zealand's conceptualisation of the child, as its current legislative efforts appear to be rooted in an outdated understanding of the child as a mere collateral witness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]