Why So Many Men “Consent Without Admissions” to Family Violence Orders — Even When Innocent

Every year, tens of thousands of men across Australia are served with Family Violence Orders (FVOs).

Some of those men deserve it. Some do not.

We don't know many because 80% to 90% of the roughly 170,000 or so FVO applications in Australia each year ARE NEVER PROVEN. Most of them are never even tested in Court.

Not because they the respondents all guilty of family violence. But because the system is stacked against contesting — a process that is costly, confusing, and career-ending before it even begins.

The Data: Ninety Percent Never Tested

According to the Centre for Innovative Justice (RMIT, 2021), “high into the nineties [per cent]” of family-violence order applications in Victoria result in a consent order without admission — and only “a couple of hearings per year” at large regional courts ever reach a contested hearing .

That means nearly every order is made without evidence being tested, without witnesses being heard, and without judicial findings of fact.

Put plainly: in the vast majority of cases, no one ever proves anything.

The “Why” Behind Male Consent

The CIJ report provides a rare window into the psychology and coercive mechanics that lead men — including those maintaining innocence — to sign away their rights under the label “consent without admissions.”

Here’s what the evidence shows.

1. Cost and Delay Pressure

Many respondents said duty lawyers advised them that fighting the order would “cost thousands” and drag on for months, with repeated adjournments and court days .

As one man told researchers:

“The lawyer said, ‘Look, just accept it without admissions… otherwise it’ll cost you thousands again.’”

Faced with the threat of financial ruin and multiple hearing delays, men often sign just to end the bleeding.

2. Employment and Reputation Risk

The moment an interim order is made, firearm licences, security clearances, and professional accreditations are automatically suspended.

A contested hearing can take months — meaning that even if cleared, the damage is done.

Signing a consent order “without admissions” allows a man to minimise court appearances and hope the issue fades quietly.

3. Emotional Exhaustion

Respondents frequently describe being shell-shocked — excluded from their home, separated from children, and sleeping in cars or motels.

As the CIJ notes, “respondents are often highly stressed when they come to court… after being excluded from the home by police” .

The legal process is confusing, the language foreign, and the goal unclear.

Many sign simply to make the nightmare stop.

4. Misinformation from Duty Lawyers

Multiple participants reported being told to “plead guilty” — despite FVOs being civil, not criminal, proceedings.

Others were told “it’s no big deal,” or that an undertaking is “the same as an order.”

In reality, a breach (even accidental) carries criminal penalties, while the original allegations remain unproven but permanently recorded.

5. Family-Law Leverage

The CIJ confirmed that men often consent strategically, believing it may help them appear cooperative in later custody negotiations — or at least avoid further accusations.

Conversely, refusing to consent can be portrayed in Family Court as “uncooperative” or “intimidating.”

So they sign. Not because they admit guilt, but because they see no safe way not to.

The Consent Trap

Once signed, the order is treated in other jurisdictions — family law, employment, firearms licensing — as if it were proof of violence, despite being expressly “without admissions.”

As the CIJ found, this creates a Kafkaesque loop:

“In the Family Law context, ‘consent without admissions’ orders are often treated as having little evidentiary weight — except when they are used against respondents as if they had admitted to violence” .

Thus, the man who signs “just to move on” finds himself punished for an admission he never made.

The Human Cost

Men who spoke to researchers described losing homes, jobs, children, and reputations — all without a hearing.

They described the process as “assembly-line justice,” where lawyers and magistrates rush to “get the order in place” and move on to the next file .

For some, the resentment and sense of injustice fester.

For others, the outcome is quiet despair.

One respondent summed it up:

“It’s much easier to say, ‘Yes, yes, yes, I’m a naughty boy, slap me on the wrist and off we go.’”

The System Knows — and Admits It

The CIJ researchers were blunt:

“System activity does not equate with system effectiveness… safety comes from reliability and fairness, not just ‘getting an order in place.’”

Even magistrates acknowledged that many men view the process as unfair and disengage as a result — making future compliance less, not more, likely.

What Needs to Change

1. Mandatory Evidence Audits – Record how many FVOs are made by consent, withdrawn, or found baseless.

2. Early Legal Advice for Respondents – Access to accurate, independent information before appearing in court.

3. Inadmissibility Reform – Replace “without admissions” with a clear statutory rule that consent orders cannot be used as evidence of guilt in any jurisdiction.

4. Procedural Justice Training – Require magistrates and police to ensure respondents understand the process and consequences.

5. Penalties for Malicious or Reckless Applications – Protect genuine victims by deterring misuse of the system.

Conclusion: Signing Away Innocence

When nine out of ten orders are never tested, justice becomes administrative.

The system counts “orders made” as success, ignoring whether they were fair, necessary, or true.

Most men who “consent without admissions” aren’t confessing — they’re capitulating.

They’re not being heard, advised, or protected by due process. They’re being processed.

Until consent orders require genuine consent — informed, voluntary, and evidence-based — Australia’s family-violence system will continue to manufacture compliance at the expense of justice.

References

• Centre for Innovative Justice (RMIT University, 2021). More Than Just a Piece of Paper: Getting Protection Orders Made in a Safe and Supported Way.

  – pp. 9-13, 35-41, 58-60, 106-110.

• Family Violence Protection Act 2008 (Vic).