“Just Leave.” If Only It Were That Simple

 

This week, Pauline Hanson suggested that women experiencing domestic and family violence should simply leave.

One of my clients did leave.

She did not announce her departure, pack every possession, or walk away with financial security and a clear plan for the future. She quietly gathered what she could safely take and escaped with her infant child.

That decision required courage, planning and an acceptance that she might have to leave most of her life behind.

What she did not know at the time was that leaving the house would not mean escaping the abuse.

After the separation, she discovered thousands of dollars in credit-card debt that had been accumulated in her name. She also found thousands of dollars in unpaid tolls, fines and other liabilities. Even after the relationship had ended, further debts and penalties continued to appear under her identity.

Three years later, the abuse has still not ended. It has simply changed form.

Her former partner contacts police and requests welfare checks when she does not respond as quickly as he believes she should. He refuses, without any genuine child-focused reason, to sign paperwork that would allow their child to obtain a passport and travel on a family holiday. He does not maintain a meaningful relationship with his child. He does not reliably contribute to the child’s financial support. Yet he continues to use legal, administrative and government systems to create stress, delay, expense and fear.

She left the house, but she did not escape the control.

This is the reality of post-separation abuse.

Domestic and family violence is not limited to physical assault. It can include financial abuse, legal abuse, harassment, surveillance, intimidation, technology-facilitated abuse, coercive control and the deliberate misuse of systems that are supposed to protect people.

A perpetrator may lose direct access to a former partner after separation, but that does not mean the desire for control disappears. Instead, the tactics may become more indirect and more difficult to identify.

The abuse may appear as repeated complaints, unnecessary police involvement, false allegations, withheld documents, financial sabotage, endless disputes over minor matters, persistent demands for information, or the use of children as a means of maintaining contact and influence.

Each individual action may appear small when viewed in isolation. Together, they can form a sustained pattern of control.

This is one of the reasons the phrase “just leave” is so damaging.

It suggests that the victim-survivor has the power to end the abuse simply by walking out the door. It places responsibility on the person being harmed rather than on the person choosing to cause the harm.

It also ignores the reality that leaving can be one of the most dangerous stages of an abusive relationship. Separation may trigger escalation because the perpetrator feels that control is being lost. A woman may face threats, stalking, financial ruin, homelessness, social isolation, legal proceedings, child-custody disputes and increased risk of violence.

Leaving may mean abandoning possessions, employment, housing, pets, family support, community connections and financial security. It may require emergency accommodation, legal assistance, police involvement, counselling, safety planning and years of rebuilding.

Even then, there is no guarantee that the abuse will stop.

For many women, the question is not simply, “Can I leave?” It is, “How do I leave safely, protect my children, survive financially and remain safe after I go?”

Those are not the questions of someone unwilling to leave. They are the questions of someone trying to survive.

The Impact on Children

Post-separation abuse does not affect only the adult victim-survivor. Children are often placed at the centre of the conflict.

They may be used to carry messages, gather information or pressure a parent. Important decisions may be deliberately delayed. Holidays, medical treatment, schooling and family events can become opportunities for obstruction and control.

Children may witness one parent living in a constant state of stress. They may see the emotional and financial consequences of repeated legal disputes, complaints and interference. They may learn that ordinary family decisions will always become battles.

This can damage their sense of safety, stability and trust.

A child should not have to grow up believing that separation means endless conflict. Nor should they be used as a tool through which one adult continues to punish another.

When a parent uses a child, the legal system or government agencies to maintain control, the harm is not limited to the former partner. It affects the child’s emotional wellbeing, relationships and understanding of what healthy behaviour looks like.

We Need to Ask Better Questions

Instead of asking, “Why didn’t she leave sooner?” we should be asking why perpetrators are still able to terrorise women long after they have left.

Why can financial institutions, administrative processes and legal systems be manipulated so easily?

Why are repeated patterns of harassment so often treated as isolated incidents?

Why must victim-survivors continually prove that a collection of seemingly minor actions forms an ongoing pattern of abuse?

Why are women expected to carry the financial, legal and emotional burden of managing another person’s abusive behaviour?

Most importantly, why do we continue to speak as though leaving is the solution when, for many women, leaving is merely the beginning of a new phase of abuse?

The Responsibility Belongs With the Perpetrator

Victim-survivors do not cause domestic violence by staying. They do not cause it by leaving. They do not cause it by responding, refusing to respond, seeking help or trying to keep the peace.

The responsibility belongs entirely with the person choosing to use violence, intimidation and control.

Your personal experience of domestic violence may be valid and important, but it is not universal. One woman’s ability to leave safely cannot be used as evidence that every other woman can do the same.

Domestic and family violence is complex. The barriers to leaving are real, and the danger does not necessarily end when the relationship does.

So no, “just leave” is not the answer.

It is an insulting oversimplification of an extraordinarily complex and often dangerous situation.

Women who leave do not simply need congratulations for walking away. They need safe housing, financial protection, legal support, responsive systems and meaningful accountability for perpetrators.

Leaving should not merely mean escaping the house.

It should mean having a genuine opportunity to live free from fear, harassment and control.

That is the standard our systems should be working toward.

About Niki Gent

Niki Gent works with families, children and organisations experiencing crisis, conflict and complex family circumstances through Family and Child Consultants. Her work includes supporting families affected by domestic and family violence, separation, post-separation conflict and high-risk parenting matters.

Niki works across metropolitan, regional and remote Australia, often responding when crises occur outside ordinary business hours and in locations where families may have limited access to specialist support. Her approach is practical, direct and firmly focused on safety, accountability and the wellbeing of children.

Through her professional work, training and community advocacy, Niki continues to challenge simplistic narratives about domestic violence and encourages services, systems and communities to respond with greater understanding, consistency and compassion.