A boy sexually harassed Lucy at school. Then his mother used an IVO to silence her

Fifteen-year-old Lucy* was on a school camp when she received a text so strange that she sent it to her mum in Melbourne asking, “What is this, a scam?”

The message from an unknown mobile phone number asked Lucy to attend a police station “for collection of an intervention order”.

The order, which police were required to serve in person, had been granted to Jordan*, a boy at Lucy’s school who had allegedly touched Lucy inappropriately multiple times. Friends had witnessed the alleged incidents and encouraged Lucy to approach school coordinators to help make it stop.

Lucy – who cannot be identified for legal reasons – discussed with her mother, Kate, how uncomfortable Jordan’s alleged touching made her feel. Lucy spoke with her coordinator, and a school-based safety plan was put in place.

But instead of providing Lucy with a safe solution, what happened next traumatised her so much that her mother, a former education worker, worries other girls and young women will be too afraid to report sexual harassment, or worse.

Unbeknown to Lucy’s family, rather than accepting the school’s plan to address the situation, Jordan’s mother made a private application for an intervention order at a children’s court to ban Lucy from discussing what happened. The application stated that Lucy had reported Jordan’s behaviour to the school and that Jordan needed protection to attend school safely and to stop Lucy from “spreading rumours”.

Victoria Legal Aid, which eventually represented Lucy, says the interim order was granted without her in court.

“The interim order essentially acted as a gag order on Lucy but not Jordan, who could freely control the schoolyard narrative,” Kate says. After the court hearing, Jordan was heard to brag at school that he had “won the case”.

The order removed Lucy’s ability to get support from friends and severely limited her movement at school and other students asked her why she had “lied”.

She became extremely anxious about inadvertently breaching the order and facing potential police charges. She developed stomach aches and couldn’t sleep.

“I felt very upset and scared because I’m not used to that stuff, I didn’t know what was going to happen and what it meant,” Lucy says.

Lucy was so distressed that Kate had fleeting second thoughts about seeking support: “I am ashamed to admit that my first reaction to the intervention order was to wish my daughter had not reported Jordan’s behaviour,” Kate says.

“[What happened] is outrageous, there is no justice in this scenario … the legal system is being used to perpetrate more harm than protection.”

According to Victoria Legal Aid, the number of intervention orders taken out between children after physical fights, online issues or personal conflict almost doubled, from 243 in 2018-19 to 472 in 2023-24, as parents at Victorian schools increasingly apply for them to deal with issues faced by their children.

The number of child clients seeking help with intervention orders has also doubled. One-third of children with orders made against them were aged 10-14.

Dr Lauren Codd, a psychologist and senior clinical manager at Berry Street Social Services, says the service sees children who have had orders put on them by other students’ parents, and they are often excluded from school.

Placing intervention orders on children who have already experienced trauma – as many respondents have – harms their prospects of recovery because attending school is protective, particularly for adolescents, Codd says.

Schools are often not resourced well enough to deal with complex problems between students, and waiting lists for specialised services are months long.

Legal Aid found the orders cause schooling disruption to more than one-third (36 per cent) of children placed on them, including missing school, changing schools or leaving school altogether. A Legal Aid review of 100 closed files found half of the young people whose schooling was disrupted by such orders are neurodivergent or had mental health issues.

Lawyers say the increase in orders against children is worrying and puts vulnerable children at risk of charges.

“[Personal safety intervention orders] are increasingly being used to manage disputes between young people, particularly within a school setting, but there is limited research into why this is occurring,” says Jackie Anders, associate director of children’s law at Victoria Legal Aid.

“Our lawyers have heard that many parents apply for an intervention order because they are dissatisfied with the way the school has responded to a dispute.”

‘[What happened] is outrageous, there is no justice in this scenario … the legal system is being used to perpetrate more harm than protection.’

Kate, Lucy’s mother

Children with neurodiversity and disability can be less likely to understand and follow the order, Anders says: “As intervention order breaches attract a criminal penalty, we are concerned that the high numbers of intervention orders made against vulnerable children place them at risk of criminalisation.”

Children with disability are already overrepresented in the youth justice system, she says.

Kate, Lucy’s mother, says the ease with which parents can obtain interim intervention orders on other children without the accused child having the chance to tell their side of the story is harmful.

“At no point was [Lucy] asked or was effort made by the court to find out about the situation with the school; there was this presumption she had done the wrong thing and would get on the internet or social media and run this up,” Kate says.

“Lucy is not likely to do that even without an intervention order, but here she is essentially with a gag order on her and no ability to defend herself, protect herself or advocate for herself, all because she was following school processes.”

Kate says she was surprised to learn the school told Lucy that many children in the strong community of engaged parents were on intervention orders.

After Lucy’s family approached Victoria Legal Aid for representation, lawyers negotiated for the withdrawal of the order against her.

Anders says Victoria Legal Aid lawyers have seen a significant increase in problematic intervention orders taken out against children, often by parents of classmates when mediation or other conflict resolution options should be used instead.

“Our lawyers noticed an increase in these orders against children after the COVID-19 lockdowns, which our research confirmed,” she says.

‘I felt very upset and scared because I’m not used to that stuff, I didn’t know what was going to happen and what it meant.’

Lucy

“We understand that parents applying for these intervention orders are driven by a desire to ensure their child is safe at school or online. But without linking children and families to mediation or support services, these court orders don’t help to resolve the root causes of disputes, and risk pushing more kids into the justice system.”

Anders wants restorative programs, such as pilot program Re-engage by Jesuit Social Services, to be funded by the state government to help schools prevent conflicts from escalating to the stage where parents seek intervention orders.

Victoria Legal Aid recommended in a recent report that schools be given greater support to resolve disputes between students, and for the number of intervention orders against school children to be tracked.

Matt Tyler, the executive director of The Men’s Project at Jesuit Social Services, says violence in schools is a growing and pressing problem, and “there is an urgent need to better support schools and parents to address the underlying reasons for behaviours rather than relying so heavily on intervention orders in response to conflicts between students”.

Codd, from Berry Street, says schools need more help to manage interpersonal issues between students. “We feel demands on schools are increasing, there is huge demand on schools to provide social welfare services they are not funded or equipped enough to really provide … and a lack of early intervention services for young people,” she says.

“What’s at stake is the prospects of than young person to live a healthy, functional life.”

A spokesman for the Victorian Department of Education says safety is its top priority and that “the issuing of intervention orders is a matter for the courts and for police”.

*Names have been changed to protect children’s identities.

Start the day with a summary of the day’s most important and interesting stories, analysis and insights. Sign up for our Morning Edition newsletter.