Why subscribe to The Relational Justice Project?
The Relational Justice Project is a public policy and social reform initiative for family relationships, institutional harm, and relational justice.
It begins from a simple proposition: family relationships are not merely private attachments. They are social infrastructure. When institutions fail to recognise, protect, or repair those relationships, private suffering becomes public harm.
This project examines relational harms including parental alienation, coercive control that obstructs family and other significant relationships, and family estrangement. These are not the same phenomenon, but each can produce relational dispossession: the loss, obstruction, or erasure of relationships that matter.
The first phase of the project is a twelve-essay series developing the foundations of a Relational Justice Manifesto. The series names the problem of relational dispossession, examines how institutions produce and reproduce relational harm, and sets out the principles of a politics and policy framework for relational justice.
The aim is to build a community of people committed to changing how society, law, and policy understand the family and family relationships.
Subscribe to follow the essay series, join the emerging conversation, and help build a public constituency for relational justice.
Political position of The Relational Justice Project
The Relational Justice Project is politically independent.
It is not a conservative project, a progressive project, a men’s movement, a fathers’ rights project, a mothers’ rights project, or a party-political campaign.
It begins from a simpler and more demanding proposition: safe and meaningful family relationships are not merely private interests. They are a public good. They are a form of social infrastructure.
When those relationships are unjustifiably severed, obstructed, weaponised, delayed, or institutionally misrecognised, the resulting harm is not merely personal. It becomes social harm. It affects children, parents, grandparents, kinship networks, mental health, public trust, legal legitimacy and intergenerational wellbeing.
That proposition should not belong to the left or the right.
Liberals should recognise it because relational continuity is bound up with human dignity, child development, procedural fairness, equality before institutions, and the protection of persons from arbitrary power.
Conservatives should recognise it because family life is one of the primary institutions through which care, duty, belonging, identity and social continuity are transmitted.
Progressives should recognise it because institutional harm often falls hardest on those without money, status, legal literacy or social power.
Centrists and independents should recognise it because the current system has become trapped between ideological claims, bureaucratic incentives, evidentiary disorder and institutional delay.
The Relational Justice Project therefore welcomes readers, contributors and allies from across the political spectrum. But it does not trade evidence for allegiance. Its commitments are relational continuity, evidentiary discipline, institutional accountability, child welfare, and the protection of safe and meaningful family relationships.
Those commitments may attract conservatives. They may attract liberals. They may attract progressives, independents and people who no longer recognise themselves in existing political categories.
That is as it should be.
The point is not to build another ideological camp.
The point is to build a constituency for relational justice.
How to participate
The Relational Justice Project is free to join. Subscribe to receive its essays and policy work and to participate in the working conversation. No financial contribution is presently requested.
Stay up-to-date
Subscribe to receive new essays, project notes, and policy commentary directly by email. You will also have access to the publication archive as the Relational Justice Manifesto develops.
This publication is for people who believe that family relationships matter, that institutional harm must be named, and that law and policy should protect children, families and significant relationships from relational dispossession.
