MARAM and DFV Risk Tools: Policy in Disguise or Professional Frameworks?

The Victorian Government’s MARAM framework is often cited as best practice in family violence risk assessment. But is it really a robust risk tool—or just a values-based policy disguised as one?

Main points:

• What MARAM gets wrong. MARAM defines risk levels using vague terms like “at risk” or “serious risk” without any evidence-based thresholds. It prioritises subjective fear over calibrated analysis .

• No audit trail. No accuracy metrics. Unlike ISO 31000, MARAM offers no likelihood/consequence modelling, no error controls, and no way to measure predictive success .

• Ideology over risk science. MARAM names “gender inequality” as a driver of risk, which is a sociopolitical position—not an evaluative risk factor .

• Why this matters. Tools like MARAM and the ACT’s DFV-RAMF shape family court outcomes, including AVOs and FVOs. If they don’t meet professional risk standards, their use may not stand up to legal scrutiny.

Conclusion:

Risk assessments must be more than well-meaning policy—they need to be defensible, measurable, and unbiased. MARAM and DFV-RAMF fall short. Legal professionals should push for tools that meet ISO 31000 standards to ensure integrity in the justice system.