B.C.’s new Family Law Act has the potential to better protect victims of domestic violence, experts say.
But advocates for women and children worry that the progressive aspects of the act could be undermined by ongoing neglect of legal aid and other front-line services that support victims of violence.
The law, which came into effect March 18, broadens the definition of family violence, clarifies risk factors to be considered in parenting cases involving violence and makes safety a key concern when determining what is in the best interests of a child.
The law also creates a new type of protection order in cases where there is a safety concern and makes it a criminal offence to breach such an order by contacting or harassing a victim.
“This can only be good, because it’s going to be seen as more serious,” said Tracy Porteous, executive director of the Ending Violence Association of B.C.
“The steps to enforcing these breaches are much clearer than they were before. So we think that, hopefully, women and kids will be safer.”
In the past, police often had difficulty navigating orders issued by various courts, said Insp. Richard Konarski, who heads the Mission RCMP detachment. Some restraining orders would have enforcement clauses, others would not.
“Someone would come with an expectation that there would be action and support from a police officer, and there would be, at best, a delay and sometimes there wouldn’t be the response that we should have provided.” he said.
Konarski, who is researching domestic violence for a PhD in criminology, said the “big ticket” aspect of the new law is that it eliminates that confusion.
“For the police it’s become a very simple thing: If a person breaches one of these protective orders, it allows us all the authority to go and apprehend the person,” he said.
“It’s now considered a criminal charge.”
Justice Minister Shirley Bond said new law will strengthen family security.
“The creation of a new protection order under the Criminal Code provides police with certainty about how they should respond to calls involving safety,” she said in a recent statement to the Times Colonist.
“It makes it clear that these are urgent calls and lives could be at stake.
“Under the old act, restraining orders may have been in place for reasons other than safety — for example, a custody issue. A protection order under the new law makes it absolutely clear that there are safety concerns.”
Laura Track, legal director at West Coast Women’s Legal Education and Action Fund, welcomed the new protection order and said the broader definition of family violence also represents a significant step forward.
“That’s really important to recognize that violence is not just physical abuse, but can also include emotional and psychological abuse, the use of threats or coercion,” she said.
“It’s also positive that judges are directed to consider family violence when determining what parenting arrangement is in the best interests of a child.”
But Track said the progressive aspects of the law risk being undone by years of cuts to women’s support services and legal aid. Women’s centres have closed, transition houses have difficulty meeting the demand, and women in family law cases often have a hard time getting legal representation, she said.
Track noted that while the new law emphasizes out-of-court dispute resolutions using mediators and arbitrators, “asking a woman to sit down in a room and negotiate with somebody that she’s terrified of is not going to lead to fair results.
Some cases absolutely have to go to court and, without access to legal aid and representation, many women are forgoing their rights in court.”
Similarly, Porteous said her organization was disappointed that the recent provincial budget failed to set aside money to train people about the implications of the new law or to improve front-line services that help identify risk, create safety plans and provide other supports to protect women and children.
“Many of them are dealing with such high caseloads that what we’re starting to see is that they can’t keep up with the demand,” she said.
“There was nothing in the budget to address that and that’s very serious.”
