A call to police to help control a juvenile’s outburst at home can often lead to the child being thrust into the family-violence legal system.
To the parents’ shock – and even against their wishes – their child has suddenly been slapped with an intervention order.
Victoria Legal Aid children’s law associate director Elicia Savvas says often the ouburst is triggered by something commonplace as controlling screen time or internet use.
But due to a lack of support services, parents felt they had no choice but to call police in a “moment of crisis”.
“These families said they were seeking de-escalation and support.
“They often didn’t support legal action being taken against their child and said the intervention order didn’t help them get access to support.”
Intervention orders against children and young people are on the rise at home and at school, according to a Victoria Legal Aid report ‘Feeling supported, not stuck’.
In the past six years, 34 per cent more children are seeking VLA legal assistance for intervention orders, the report found.
Staggeringly, a third of its young clients facing intervention orders were 10 to 14 years old.
Victim-survivors of family violence, children living with a disability, neurodiversity or mental health issues or First Nations children were highly represented.
VLA is calling for law reform so young children are no longer slapped with intervention orders.
Savvas says family-violence and personal-safety intervention orders are designed for adults, not kids.
“We question whether these children, most of whom also live with disability or have faced some sort of trauma, can fully understand and follow these orders.”
A father Luke told the report that his 15-year-old son was likely to lose control and not abide by an IVO – which would then put his son on the wrong side of the law.
“He’d be thinking about his anger in that moment.
“What am I supposed to do then? I’m supposed to call the police and have him charged with a crime?”
Savvas says the situation was working against families seeking help and being kept safe.
More resources for “sustainable, wrap-around support” were needed to resolve family disputes and repair harm.
Also of concern to the VLA was rising numbers of personal-safety intervention orders at schools.
Often the VLA clients were retaliating to bullying. As a result of the IVOs, their education was seriously disrupted by changing schools or leaving school completely.
The VLA report recommends the state’s education department provides more resources to mediate peer disputes, as well as restorative options outside the justice system.
It also recommends restorative justice options, outside of the justice system.
IVOs don’t go to the root cause of difficult issues at schools, Savvas says.
Elena Campbell, from RMIT University’s Centre for Innovative Justice, led a national study into responses to adolescent violence in the home.
She says young-person IVO numbers have worsened since her 2020 report.
It coincides with declining mental health in young people and rising social media use, as a result of the Covid era.
The biggest factor to young people’s violence in the home was them being exposed to family violence. Early intervention was key, Campbell said.
“We step in and remove the adult perpetrator and think our job is done.
“But we don’t invest in recovery – which should be the start point not the end point.”
Campbell agreed more resources were needed to support schools.
At the moment, schools went to “Defcon 5 as soon as something dramatic happens”.
“No one feels they have the tools or the time so we end up defaulting to an IVO very quickly.”
Teachers needed training in managing conflict, student trauma and the issues behind behaviour dysregulation, Campbell said.
Schools needed better-resourced wellbeing teams, as well as strong ongoing partnerships with outside support agencies.
She says family violence laws need to be reviewed to distinguish between adults and children.
“By taking a zero-tolerance, no-excuses approach to family violence, it’s left us in the ridiculous situation we have with 11 year olds.
“Their developmental age is enough of a limitation but they may have significant trauma or may have an autism diagnosis.
“They can’t possibly understand the order or don’t have a hope of complying.”
