What is a McKenzie Friend?

A McKenzie Friend is a person who supports a litigant in person in court by taking notes, helping with paperwork and offering practical and moral support. They are not a solicitor and do not provide legal representation unless the court grants additional rights.

Can I go to family court without a solicitor?

Yes. Many people represent themselves in UK family court as litigants in person. Bridge The Gap shares community observations and resources to help you understand the process. It does not provide legal advice.

What is Bridge The Gap?

Bridge The Gap is a community-built platform by litigants and McKenzie Friends that highlights the gaps between what people assume about family court and what actually happens.

Protection Orders & Domestic Abuse

Looking for help in your family court proceedings?Bridge The Gap is a free, community-built guide to UK family court, written by litigants and McKenzie Friends, for litigants. Real observations, plain English, and people who can help.

Start here About the site

Guided Explorer

🛡️

Subject Guide

Protection Orders & Domestic Abuse

Your safety matters. These are observed options the court may consider — shared insights, not legal advice. Always seek immediate professional help if you are at risk.

Want support with this?

A McKenzie Friend can help you navigate non-molestation & protection in family court.

Cookies

We use essential cookies only, such as remembering this choice and keeping you signed in. If we add analytics cookies in the future, we will ask first. Read our Privacy Policy.

Protection Orders & Domestic Abuse

Assumption: The divorce is nearly done — we can sort the finances out afterwards.

Assumption: Legal aid was removed from family cases for good reasons — the government knew what it was doing.

Assumption: Mediation forces you to agree to something.

Assumption: I do not need to prepare for the Cafcass safeguarding call — I will just answer their questions honestly.

Assumption: I gave up work and ran the home. That is a contribution. The court will treat it as 50/50.

Assumption: I suffered domestic abuse throughout the marriage. That has to be taken into account in how the assets are divided.

Assumption: He is refusing to engage with the financial proceedings. His solicitors won't respond. There is nothing I can do until he decides to participate.

Assumption: I need an expert witness to read our messages and tell the court who the abuser is. That's the only way the judge will understand what's really happening.

Assumption: My deed of trust protects my money — I had it drawn up by a solicitor.

Assumption: The court is a neutral space — once we separate, he has no power over me there.

Assumption: The MIAM is just a box to tick before I can go to court.

Assumption: As a victim of domestic abuse, I shouldn't be expected to negotiate — the court should understand I can't.

Assumption: The law says both parents have a right to see their child, so the court can't just refuse contact.

Assumption: If the CPS dropped the charges, the family court can't find abuse either.

Assumption: All McKenzie Friends are the same.

Assumption: An alcohol test is always definitive.

Assumption: The court will reduce my ex's share of the assets because of the abuse during the marriage.

Assumption: The court will always keep contact going between my child and their other parent — that's the child's right, no matter what happened between us.

Assumption: I cannot be ordered to pay costs in children proceedings — that only happens in financial cases.

Assumption: If I've experienced domestic abuse, going through the court process means reliving it, unprotected, facing my abuser directly.

Assumption: My partner solely owns our house, so if they want me out, I have no right to stay whatsoever.

Assumption: Given the history of abuse and a non-molestation order, I can just redact or withhold my bank statements to protect my safety.

Assumption: If my account has any inconsistencies, the judge won't believe me and my case is over.

Assumption: (Hague Convention) Once I've complied with a return order, that's the end of it.

Assumption: If I'm worried the other parent might take our child abroad, especially if they're a foreign national with ties elsewhere, that justifies a travel ban.

Assumption: If I initially deny the findings against me, then later say I've changed my mind and accept them, the court and the other parent have to take that at face value.

Assumption: "Supervised" and "supported" contact are basically the same thing, just cheaper one way.

Assumption: Having parental responsibility means I'm entitled to know exactly where my child lives and every detail about their day-to-day life.

Assumption: A section 91(14) order (restricting future applications) can only be made if someone specifically applies for it.

Cookies