Clare’s Law is a policy developed to notify a person if their current or ex-partner has any previous history of domestic violence or abusive behaviour. The scheme was named after Clare Wood, a British woman who was murdered by her abusive ex-boyfriend in 2009. It was formally rolled out in England and Wales in 2014. Devastated by her death, Clare’s family fought for change, so others would not face the same fate and have access to the information she never did.
Although in theory, Clare’s Law aims to empower potential victims of intimate partner violence by providing access to information about their partner’s history of abuse, in my respectful opinion, Clare’s Law raises significant practical and ethical concerns.
Here they are:
Utility & Effectiveness: The effectiveness of Clare’s Law in preventing intimate partner violence is questionable. Notably, any person who would go so far as to complete an application for disclosure of a boyfriend’s history of intimate partner violence knows enough to end the relationship. What triggered that curiosity? Moreover, how will we ever know how useful Clare’s Law really is? Will we know which unhealthy relationships continued and which healthy relationships ended? Data on the number of applications and outcomes are limited, making it challenging to assess its true impact on reducing violence or supporting victims effectively.
Educational Initiatives: Instead of investing in disclosure schemes, resources could be redirected towards comprehensive educational programs aimed at teens, youths and young adults. The money invested Clare’s Law could be better spent on a public education campaign to end or curtail intimate partner violence. There should be programs in schools and colleges focused on promoting healthy relationship behaviours, recognizing early signs of abuse or maladaptive behaviour, and fostering respectful attitudes amongst young men and women. Funding for public education campaigns is crucial to reducing the incidence of violence. Also, strengthening support services such as shelters, counselling, and legal aid would provide immediate assistance to victims and help them navigate safety concerns more effectively than relying solely on pre-relationship disclosure.
Stigma and Consequences: There’s a risk that individuals obtaining disclosure could face unintended consequences, such as increased risk if they remain in a high-risk relationship. There could be repercussions if the disclosed information is not acted upon with immediacy.
Privacy vs. Safety Balance: The law necessitates a delicate balance between the right to privacy and the right to safety. Although safety considerations often prevail, the process inherently involves accessing sensitive personal information without an individual’s consent, which can raise ethical questions. Will the police then investigate the inquiry and place that person under watch? Will the police follow up with the applicant to ensure their safety? Can the person informed release this information to others such as family, friends and the employer of the alleged abuser?
While I emphatically agree that intimate partner violence is a major public health and safety concern and that no person should be unaware of the past violent history of their partner, Clare’s Law’s well-intentioned effort to mitigate such risks warrant careful consideration. Any person seeking such disclosure already has cause to end that relationship. Redirecting resources towards preventive education and comprehensive support services could potentially offer more sustainable solutions to addressing intimate partner violence in communities.
Versions of Clare’s Law have been adopted in Saskatchewan, Newfoundland, and Labrador and Alberta. On April 4, 2021, Ontario New Democratic Party MPP Jennie Stevens introduced a version of Clare’s Law under the title Bill 274, “Intimate Partner Violence Disclosure Act”. Bill 274 was defeated 15 votes to 34 against.
This article was recently published in Lexis Nexis’s Law360 at: https://www.law360.ca/ca/family/articles/2406306/my-critique-of-clare-s-law
Steve Benmor, B.Sc., LL.B., LL.M. (Family Law), C.S., Cert.F.Med., C.Arb., FDRP PC, is the founder and principal lawyer of Benmor Family Law Group, a boutique matrimonial law firm in downtown Toronto. He is a Certified Specialist in Family Law, a Certified Specialist in Parenting Coordination and was admitted as a Fellow to the prestigious International Academy of Family Lawyers. Steve is regularly retained as a Divorce Mediator/Arbitrator and Parenting Coordinator. Steve uses his 30 years of in-depth knowledge of family law, court-room experience and expert problem-solving skills in Divorce Mediation/Arbitration to help spouses reach fair, fast and cooperative divorce settlements without the financial losses, emotional costs and lengthy delays from divorce court.
Editorial note: This article was first published on LinkedIn in October 2025 and is republished here for reference.
Share this article on: