What does infidelity and affairs have to do with Domestic Violence

Under the Family Law Act (1975) the government introduced “no fault divorce” which allowed an individual to divorce their spouse without a ‘provable reason’. It removed the onus of the unhappy partner to remain trapped in an abusive, toxic and unhealthy marriage when they can’t prove the spouse was to blame, being disrespectful or disloyal. Those grounds ranged from habitual drunkenness to adultery, and many cases involved the use of private investigators.

The Family Court deals with much more than just marital disputes. It’s starts with the proposition that there has been escalated conflict that can not be resolved and with an expectation that all avenues of dispute resolution have been attempted. But essentially the issues being raised amount to dealing with violence, abuse, mental illness and drug and alcohol abuse,”

Family law was viewed to be run by very strict belief system that didn’t take into consideration the psychological and social consequences of a breakdown of a relationship.

The Family Court deals with much more than just marital disputes.

The aim of the Family Law Act was to remedy those problems by introducing a Family Court of Australia that would not only deal with legal issues but provide counselling services for unresolved conflict that would reduce the known impact of violence and abusive behaviours on children.

In 1974, when the Act was being designed, family violence hardly rated a mention by the politicians who were establishing it and the documents that were explaining the reasoning for the new laws.

When we understand this, and the disparity in violence reported, it helps to understand that the adversarial system, rules, strategy and decision-making by lawyers, who often have commercial law backgrounds, are not fit for purpose for dealing with those sorts of issues.

Before that in 1959, then Attorney-General Sir Garfield Barwick introduced a federal law: the Matrimonial Causes Bill, stipulating 14 grounds for divorce.

This included desertion, adultery, habitual drunkenness, cruelty, insanity and imprisonment.

Typically you’d hire a private investigator to spy on your spouse.

‘He’ as PI’s were usually men, would hang around outside and wait for the bedroom light to go out. He’d then knock on the door and burst in with his camera and take pictures of the couple in the compromising position.

The pictures would then be used in court as evidence of adultery.

It was a slight on character, a judgement of worthiness and a means of shaming with the intention of exclusion.

This desire to “punish” a party by attributing blame to the “sinner” was deeply rooted in religious principles underpinning marriage at the time and a societal moral code of entering into an intimate and respectful relationship til death do you part, forsaking all others.

It’s a very moralistic approach to marriage and one that by the middle of the 20th century was out of sync with the majority of the population. The main goal of marriage, earlier on, was to act as an alliance between families. Throughout history, and even today, families arranged marriages for couples. Most couples didn’t marry because they were in love, but for economic liaisons or increase in social standing.

“Some couples who’d privately agreed to separate would stage adulterous trysts for later evidential use in court.”

The introduction of no-fault divorce has made the capacity to trust and tolerate indiscretions difficult. With the expectation of respect untethered to loyalty within the institution of marriage has seen the structure of families and relationships change significantly.

A client once showed me a text from her husband to another woman he was ‘chatting’ with about the impact of his emotional affair on his wife. Despite writing in the text that he and the other woman ‘had talked about having sex’ and kissed twice, inappropriately texting all the time, and clearly in a relationship of some sort – the ‘chatter’ replied ‘

“I guess she feels if the intent is there well it may as well happened. The emotional betrayal was no different, but anyway your’e not Robinson Crusoe, this stuff happens and I think the thought of the act itself is a probably betrayal.”

The unintended consequences of affairs, flings or a one night stands for the person who is showing up as loyal and committed in the institution of marriage, reflects an attitude of disrespect – a root cause of of coercive control.

Betrayal, lies and omissions are abusive behaviours that impact on the emotional and psychological safety of the life a partner thought they were living.

Betrayal cuts deep and hurts. It will undoubtedly cause doubts and an emotional reaction that is often difficult to recover from.

The consideration of infidelity in the course of family law proceedings, criminal investigations and civil protection orders is a strong indicator of family violence. The ex-husband of my client in a reflection back to his ‘chatter’ said,

My biggest regret was not being honest with her at the time I was inappropriately texting.

“Duh”.

The fact that an affair requires omissions, lies and deception casts doubt on the truth of all other information, statements and claims – particularly in a court of law where discrediting the witness or victim is a strategy deployed in defending allegations.

An intimate relationship with someone other that your wife or long term partner becomes a pattern of behaviour. A willingness to protect oneself with lies for the advantages being received. By ignoring this intentional behaviour and the impact it has on the wellbeing and psychological health of their intended victim, is discarding the significant evidence of abuse being experienced and dismissing crucial markers of a victims reactive abuse responses.

As a police officer I would see the source of many of the Domestic Violence arguments were ignited by betrayal, something that was beyond my jurisdiction to hold someone accountable for – but it certainly helped identify the perpetrator. For the purpose of this blog – he was either lathered in guilt and hung his head in shame, unable to unmake the decision to cheat having been caught out or he dismissed the impact this violation on trust and security within the relationship.

Victims express a loss of self worth, reduced self esteem and de-stabilised well-being. The experience renumeration trying to piece together the when and where – and only to identify their own failings in not being able to see it. A world they once knew wasn’t real, it wasn’t what she thought.

Affairs confirm an attitude of entitlement, with statements that attempt to Justify. Excuse. Defend their choices, such as

“Our marriage wasn’t the best and in 2015 a married mother of 2 pursued me.
At the time I was feeling unneeded, alienated however at the same time felt cherished by the other women.
At first I thought it was a little bit of fun, but after a while she opened up to me and said that she was in a loveless marriage.
I did not sleep with her, but we were talking about it.
I had an emotional connection with her and that made me feel good about myself.
I am trying to make this transition less painful for the kids as possible. The sacrifices that a parent makes.
That’s my biggest mistake, not saying anything when I wasn’t happy in our relationship.
We have developed over the years and with the way we deal with ourselves and partners.
I’m definitely not defending myself.
When there is no love in the relationship it does cause resentfulness.”

These feeble attempts to justify a decision that impacts tremendously on someone else can only be seen as a tactic to control the righteous narrative and power within the relationship. Now for the final response from his online ‘chatter’

Female – hmmmm we don’t let her guilt you into it. She’s the one that ended the relationship.
Him – No guilt just need to move on and look for a stable future.

The other issue to consider is the ‘default’ parenting impact when there are children. Whilst the cheater was meeting up, texting or kissing women other than his wife/partner, he was absent from his role with the family as husband or a father.

He prioritised his own needs over that of his children but still claims to be ‘SACRIFICING’ as a parent by staying with their mother because there is no love – now that’s a coward. Someone who can’t have a grown up conversation and prepare themselves for the consequences of making their own decisions is a manipulator – another indicator of coercive control.

Again, it creates a power imbalance in the relationship and helps establish the type of offender we are engaging with.

Whilst the Family Court does not consider the reasons for the marriage or relationship breaking down or places little value on the impact those reasons have had on the children of that marriage, it assumes that by the time the matter is being heard in a court room that the restorative work required after betrayal has been done and the parents will If the intention of abuse is to cause harm and hurt people, then blindsiding a partner with intimate betrayal will no doubt cause

Humiliation, Negating, Criticizing.

If the intention of abusive behaviour such as lies, omissions or half truths is to control the outcome of a narrative they are seeking to maintain for their advantage, there is no doubt the abuser will be negating, the responsibility of his role in that family and as a partner. Thirdly and the most devastating of all is the criticism delivered along with the crushing blow that

I did not choose you in that moment
I did not choose our family in that moment
I did not want to loose what I had but I also wanted that
You are not good enough for me

Psychological abuse involves a person’s attempts to frighten, control, or isolate you. It’s in the abuser’s words and actions, as well as their persistence in these behaviours. They use tactics that are meant to undermine self-esteem, presenting as harsh and relentless.

Since coercive control has become a mainstream, yet often murky body of water, practitioners in counselling and dispute resolutions are being asked to identify the impact of the tactics being deliberately and intentionally used by the party to coerce and control the victim of abuse as it invariably disables their capacity.

For instance, when a client told me she had reported a rape by a friend of her friend, her ex-husband then threatened to use that information to humiliate her in court and cast doubt on her mental health. Not only a severe case of victim blaming, but an intentional act that would knowingly cause psychological harm. He physically had to apply to the state government for the Police report and pay for the information that was then sent to him who then instructed his solicitor.

Another client highlighted that her abuse was primarily financial in which there was gambling, lies and gaslighting. It became clear that the unilateral decisions were considered and deliberate in the attempt to hide resources, create a narrative of the income being earned and with the intention to deceive and deprive. Deception is a spectrum and the seriousness arises when the perpetrator knowingly carries out the behaviour understanding the foreseen impact of harm and the severity increases when attempts are made to conceal or cover up the deception.

This demonstrates that simple acts of physical violence, controlling finances and preventing the victim from seeing friends and family are not the sole elements of coercive control. The misuse of intimacy is an abuse of power, exerted in the attempt to control an appearance, narrative or belief. Every incident will probably contain traces of micro acts of aggression and resentment so it’s important for practitioners, friends and family to support victims of betrayal in finding the right support.

“It is not about isolated incidents, but a pattern of behaviour and subtle tactics used.”

– Joplin Lawyers

As part of the recovery of an affair, victims of abuse often need counselling to overcome what is considered a traumatic experience.

Upstream Wellness is course for victims of domestic and family violence and those who have been misidentified as offenders in building the confidence to walk away from abusive relationships or into a police station to seek protection. We prioritise wellbeing over legals knowing that depending on jurisdiction you will require a level of mental clarity and resilience to withstand the criticism and counter claims made by your perpetrator.

Our course is made up of pick n mix sessions.

Helping you gather the evidence and build the confidence to walk away from an abusive relationship, into a police station to report it or a court room for protection.