Five years after the Domestic Abuse Act, too many survivors are still falling through the cracks

Five years have passed since the Domestic Abuse Act became law. At the time, it was presented as a turning point, a proper shift in how domestic abuse is defined and responded to in England and Wales. 

There have been improvements, but there is still a clear gap between what the law says and what people actually experience when they reach out for help. 

From working alongside survivors and seeing how systems operate in practice, one thing stands out: the framework is there, but the vital support isn’t. 

I started speaking out as a SafeLives Pioneer five years ago, at a time when I didn’t feel like I had a voice at all. Being a Pioneer has been life changing. It gave me the space to use my experience and turn it into something useful, not just for me, but for others too.  

What I’ve learned is simple: when survivors are properly listened to, it doesn’t just change individual lives, it can help shift systems that have been stuck for far too long. 

A postcode lottery for safety

Where someone lives still determines the level of support they receive. 

In some areas, there are specialist services, joined-up working between agencies, and timely responses when someone seeks help. 

In other places, provision is limited. People are referred on, placed on waiting lists, or left with very little beyond a phone number and a promise of contact. 

That matters because reaching out for help is rarely a casual decision. It often comes after a long period of fear, uncertainty and isolation. If the response is delayed or unclear, that moment of courage can pass, and the opportunity to intervene is lost. 

Safety should not depend on postcode. But in practice, it still does. 

We also need to be mindful that not everyone has access to digital technology, reliable internet, or the confidence to navigate online systems. We also cannot assume that everyone seeking support speaks or reads English fluently.  

Information is only useful if people can actually access and understand it. Simple barriers, such as QR codes that lead to English-only landing pages, can prevent people from getting the help they need.  

Organisations should think more broadly about accessibility by providing information in the main languages spoken within their communities and offering both digital and printed formats. If support is to be truly inclusive, it must be designed with the needs of all survivors in mind, not just those who are easiest to reach. 

Children recognised in law, but still not supported

The Act recognised children as victims of domestic abuse in their own right. That was an important step. 

But recognition without consistent support does not go far enough. 

Children living with domestic abuse carry its impact into every part of their lives- school, sleep, relationships, mental health and long-term development. The effects are not temporary, and they do not disappear when the immediate situation changes. 

Yet access to recovery support for children remains patchy and often dependent on short-term funding. Some services do excellent work, including culturally responsive and trauma-informed support for families from minoritised communities, but too often, those services are left in a position where their future is uncertain. 

The law has not kept pace

Abuse today is not limited to physical proximity. It can be constant and invasive, through phones, messaging platforms, social media, tracking devices and shared digital access. Coercive control often continues long after separation and can be enabled by technology in ways that are difficult to detect or stop. 

Despite this, technological abuse is still not clearly reflected in the statutory framing of domestic abuse in a way that matches modern reality. 

There is also a gap in how younger victims are recognised. Abuse can and does happen in relationships involving under-16s, but the legal position does not fully reflect that. 

The reality has moved on and the law needs to catch up. 

Court processes still place too much pressure on victims

There have been important changes in the family courts, including limits on direct cross-examination by perpetrators. That was a necessary reform. 

But survivors are still expected to navigate a complex system while under significant stress, often without clear guidance or automatic protections. 

Special measures exist, but they are frequently treated as something that must be requested and justified, rather than the default position. 

That creates an unnecessary burden. Protection in court should be automatic unless someone chooses otherwise. 

Migrant survivors are still being left without equal protection

For migrant survivors, the barriers are even higher. 

No Recourse to Public Funds rules still prevent access to safe housing and financial support for many. At the same time, fear of immigration enforcement continues to stop people from seeking help at all. 

When safety is weighed against immigration consequences, the system is not offering real protection. 

A clear separation between domestic abuse support and immigration enforcement is essential if survivors are to come forward without fear. 

What still needs to change

The Domestic Abuse Act was a significant step forward, but it should have been just the beginning, not the end. 

Five years on, the gaps are clear. What’s needed now is a more joined-up approach that actually matches the intent of the legislation. That means national standards so access to support doesn’t depend on where someone lives, along with stable, long-term funding for specialist domestic abuse services. 

It also means court protection being treated as the default, with special measures in place automatically unless a survivor chooses to opt out, rather than something they have to request under pressure.  

The legal definition itself also needs updating to properly reflect modern abuse, including technological abuse, and to ensure under-16s are fully recognised. 

Children who have lived with domestic abuse also need sustainable, properly funded recovery services rather than the short-term provision that exists in too many areas, and migrant survivors must have equal protection, including a clear firewall between support services and immigration enforcement so that accessing help never comes with added fear. 

The Domestic Abuse Act created a foundation, but it is not enough.