The Cost of Compliance: A Brief Reflection on Gender Bias in Family Court Enforcement

Family Court is supposed to be a place where "justice" prevails, where disputes over custody, support, and so-called co-parenting are resolved with the best interests of children in mind. But for most Protective Moms, their experiences within the courtroom feel far from just, equitable or fair.

The System often seems to tilt in favor of one party, statistically speaking, the Father. This leaves the Mother fighting an uphill battle, both emotionally, mentally, physically and financially. 

Consider this scenario, drawn from real-life experiences: a Protective Mother, diligently following an existing Court Order, steps into the courtroom to seek its enforcement. The Mother was prepared to uphold the law and protect her children’s stability. Yet, she’s subjected to grueling scrutiny, nine months of back-and-forth, ultimately spending seven hours on the stand, defending her actions, her credibility and character. Meanwhile, the Father, who has brazenly violated the same court order for over a year, faces a mere 45 minutes of questioning. This stark disparity isn’t just a mistake - it’s a reflection of the deep gender bias that permeates Family Court proceedings.

The financial toll is equally staggering and inequitable. Protective Mothers often find themselves pleading their case to the tune of thousands upon thousands of dollars in legal fees, hiring Attorneys, pouring over evidence, losing out on work and navigating endless hearings to enforce what should be a straightforward process, enforcing an existing court order. In contrast, Perpetrating Fathers who defy these orders frequently do so with little to no consequences, delaying accountability for months or even years on end. The Court’s leniency toward these violations undermines its authority and places an unfair burden on the complying Mother, who must bear the emotional, mental and financial cost of seeking enforcement. This leniency also emboldens non-compliant Fathers, undermining the Court’s role as an enforcer of binding agreements. In short, Perpetrating Fathers are routinely permitted to mock the Court and the Judge that presides over them.

This imbalance leaves one to wonder: Why does "The System" seem to penalize those who follow "the rules" while giving a pass to those who don’t? The answer lies in a mix of outdated stereotypes, inconsistent enforcement, and a lack of resources to hold brazen violators accountable. This results in Mothers being held to a higher standard, as they're expected to prove their worthiness as both parents and litigants, while Fathers’ lapses are too easily excused, ignored and minimized. This double standard not only erodes trust in the judicial system but also jeopardizes innocent children, who suffer the most when Court Orders meant to protect them are ignored.

So, what can be done? First, the Courts must prioritize consistent enforcement of orders, with swift consequences for violations, regardless of the parent’s gender.

Second, Judges and Court Officials need training to recognize and address implicit biases that skew proceedings.

Finally, providing more accessible legal resources for Protective Moms - especially those facing financial strain - would level the playing field.

To be clear: Family Court should be a beacon of hope, not an environment where one parent fights against both their ex and The System itself. It’s time to recalibrate the scales of justice to ensure that compliance is rewarded and encouraged, while violations are addressed; where every parent is held to the same standard. At no point should the Court undermine justice when it fails to enforce its own orders.