On 24 March 2022 Italian newspaper La Repubblica published an article that was a cause of celebration for mothers around the world: a Supreme Court judgment ruled in favour of mother Laura Massaro, bringing to an end her 11 year battle to protect her son from the father he fears.

I am raising money to translate Laura’s judgment into Croatian to help mothers fighting similar cases in family law cases in Croatia, and to help experts and activists lobby for changes to the law and professional guidelines.

I have been given a quote of £750 to translate Laura’s judgment into Croatian. I have found a certified legal translator able to translate the Italian judgment into Croatian, supported by a professor of law with experience in translating Italian legal texts into Croatian.

I will make this translation available to anyone who needs it. This will help hundreds of mothers and their children who are suffering in Croatia today and stop these practices harming people in the future.

Why is this important?

Laura Massaro's case hit the headlines in Italy when she chose to break the silence surrounding family law cases and protest publicly about what was happening to her and her child. But her case is illustrative of what is happening to thousands of mothers and children around the world.

The Italian court ordered Laura Massaro's son to live with his father - but Laura Massaro had alleged domestic abuse against the father. She fears for her son's life. Her son wishes to live with his mother. He is scared of his father, which is quite natural given the concerns his mother has raised. But due to the use of a legal tactic named “parental alienation” the court ruled his wishes and feelings were a result of manipulation by his mother – and Laura was labelled an “alienating parent”.

Croatia has been badly impacted by "parental alienation" theory which has become the received wisdom throughout the child protection system. However, "parental alienation" theory has been discredited by many international organisations and professional bodies. Even so, it is still weaponised in family law cases to order unsafe contact between children and abusive parents and to separate children from protective parents in the most barbaric way.

"Parental alienation" theory was concocted in the USA by Richard Gardner in the 1960s. Gardner committed suicide just before it came to light that he was a paedophile sympathiser.

"Parental alienation" theory has rendered laws protecting the human and legal rights of children and victims of abuse inoperable in Croatia and many other countries. This is what has caused Laura Massaro and her son 11 years of agony, robbing them of his childhood and causing pain and grief to the whole family. In some cases the decisions of the courts based on findings of "parental alienation" amount to condoning incest. All too often newspapers in Croatia and around the world report children are murdered following the failure of courts to act on reports of domestic abuse.

Yet, when a mother tries to protect her child from an abusive ex partner she risks being accused of "parental alienation" by a psychologist or psychiatrist. If that happens the court will invariably order the child lives with the abusive former partner and even ban all contact between mother and child. This is exactly what happened to Laura Massaro. She was banned from seeing her son for at least 3 months. The court said if Laura "changed her ways" (i.e. her son stopped resisting contact with his father), she may be allowed contact with her son – but only under supervision.

This sounds like a scenario from a nightmare or horror film, but it is the reality for many mothers – and some fathers – in family law court cases over child arrangements after relationship breakdown. Good, loving parents suddenly find themselves completely unable to see their own children, or forced to enable contact with an ex-partner that they know is a risk to their child. Sometimes the unsafe parents have criminal convictions for assault and abuse, but the family court does not consider this important. This sounds insane to anyone outside the court system, and it is.

Where the abusive parent is truly an unfit parent but the safe parent has been labelled an alienator due to their efforts to protect their child, the child may be taken into care, causing them yet more trauma and rendering them vulnerable. Young people in care are among the most severely marginalised and vulnerable people in our society. Why would the courts remove a child from a perfectly good parent desperate to protect them and put them into care?

Domestic abuse and family law

When a couple lands in court over child arrangements there is likely to be abusive or coercive controlling behaviour involved - otherwise the parents would have managed to reach a more or less amicable agreement out of court. This report estimates 70-90% of cases in family courts feature domestic abuse.

However, research shows that where there are allegations of domestic abuse, if the other parent (usually the father) makes a counter-allegation of “parental alienation” the non-violent parent is at serious risk of losing custody of the child altogether.

The more serious the abuse, the more strenuously the child resists contact and the more likely they are to be forced to live with their abuser and deprived of all contact with their safe parent.

This visual (credit to Natalie Page at #TheCourtSaid) illustrates the Catch-22 that traps domestic abuse victims and their children in family law cases:

Children who attempt to escape this nightmare by running away put their mothers at risk of being imprisoned, as this UK documentary revealed.

Why is this happening?

It sounds unbelievable, but judges are under no obligation to go through training in domestic abuse. When it comes to other people in the court system, such as social workers and psychologists, there are question marks over how they are trained.

It has also become clear that if judges do not follow the law there is often very little a citizen can do to address that.

There are issues of lack of transparency, accountability and good governance in the family court and child protection systems. Conflict of interest is a problem. It is becoming clear that there is a lot of money to be made out of family law cases. The incentives for professionals in the court system are not always aligned with the welfare of children.

There is a lot of work to be done to change this system, and if there are financial motivations to maintain the status quo it is going to be an uphill struggle. However, this comes down to fundamental issues of democracy, the rule of law and child welfare so it is of the utmost importance to deal with what is part of an epidemic of violence against women and children.

How is this impacting mothers and children?

This nightmare is impacting the health of protective parents and children, with most reporting anxiety, depression, post traumatic stress disorder, fibromyalgia and other physical health conditions related to extreme stress, as well suicidal ideation. Research is currently underway to investigate the health impacts, homicide and suicide rates linked to domestic abuse and family court on women and children.

Family court cases are shrouded in secrecy, ostensibly to protect the privacy of the children, but that secrecy means it is very hard for those involved to get help. But children are starting to speak out about their experiences.

A survivor of child sexual abuse speaks in the video below of her experiences. She asks "why are we treating dogs better than we are treating children in our communities?". She speaks of her determination to become a lawyer to save other young people.

This autistic young man tells of the distress and psychological trauma inflicted on him through the family courts. Parents and children with special needs and disabilities, those from racial and ethnic minorities and foreign nationals are particularly vulnerable and at particular risk due to discriminatory practices rife in family court systems.

What can we do about it?

It takes a lot for a parent trapped in a family law case to speak out because they may be threatened with having their children taken away from them, slapped with gagging orders, fined or imprisoned. But things have reached the point where remaining silent is no longer an option. Thanks to the bravery of victims and their children who are speaking out, the international community is starting to take note of our plight.

Here, a Platform of United Nations and regional mechanisms voices its concern over ignoring the risks of intimate partner violence in the determination of child custody.

In October 2021, the European Parliament passed a resolution on the impact of intimate partner violence and custody rights on women and children.

A panel at the 2022 Congress of the UN Commission for Women noted that the impacts of systemic miscarriages of justice in family courts were tantamount to torture.

Thanks to advocates including Angelina Jolie, in the United States laws are being strengthened to protect victims and their children.

But there is still a long way to go. Many states, and many judges, are reluctant to change the status quo. We need to lobby lawmakers and professional bodies to outlaw the use of unscientific, harmful theories to label parents with false mental health diagnoses that mean they are judged unfit to care for their children.

This is why Laura Massaro’s judgment is helpful. In the European Union, this judgment may help build a body of case law that will one day be binding on all member states. And as more jurisdictions change their legal practice, more may follow suit worldwide, freeing women and children around the world from a direct assault on their rights, freedoms and welfare.

Victims of domestic abuse, including those trapped in the nightmare of family courts, are often in a poor financial situation, and sometimes left homeless, due to domestic abuse or through being financially drained by expensive and lengthy legal proceedings. They are often unable to work due to poor health as a result of extreme and prolonged stress.

This is why we need to raise funds to get Laura's judgment translated. Advocates for safe parents in Croatia and around the world need access to case law that helps make the case for protective parents.

This work is urgent

There are children who need to be returned to their mothers today.

There are children who are at risk of being traumatised, abused, scarred for life or even killed by being removed from safe and caring mothers and put in the hands of abusers.

This is the #MeToo movement for children.

We need to ensure child safety and welfare is prioritised in all decisions made in our courts.

We need to start work on this translation right now so we can end the practice of removing children against their will from safe parents.

Please give whatever you can today to help make this happen!

Transparency pledge

I am a private individual collecting money to pay for this translation which I will share with anyone who needs it.

I will publish the receipt for the translation.

If I should collect more money than needed any extra will go to the SpasiMe Fund for emergency assistance to victims of domestic and sexual violence in Croatia.

Useful links

In Croatia: #SpasiMe ["#SaveMe"] citizens initiative

In the UK: The Court Said Campaign for Survivor Family Justice, SHERA research into health impacts of family court

In the USA: National Safe Parents Coalition, National Family Violence Law Center