Victoria's Plan for a New Manslaughter Charge After Family Violence, Explained

Victorian Labor Premier Ben Carroll has promised a new manslaughter law that would apply when a person dies by suicide after family violence.

The pledge was reported on 20 September 2026 as part of a wider package on family violence and sexual offences. It would create criminal liability where coercion, abuse or sustained violence came before a suicide. That differs from usual homicide law, which covers acts that cause death directly. The promise is conditional on Labor being re-elected, and it would still require legislation.

A second proposed offence would apply to a perpetrator who abandons a family violence victim in need of medical care. Labor described both proposals as Australian-first offences aimed at closing loopholes, according to The Guardian.

Other coverage called the manslaughter proposal a 'slow femicide' charge, language used by The Sydney Morning Herald. The phrase points to deaths that follow prolonged abuse rather than a single violent incident.

The package also sets out higher maximum and standard sentences. Labor pledged to lift the maximum penalty for rape from 25 years' imprisonment to life imprisonment. It pledged to add five years to the maximum penalty for every other serious sexual offence.

For persistent breach of family violence intervention orders, the maximum would double from five years to 10 years' imprisonment. For murder of a current or former partner, the standard sentence would rise from 25 years to 30 years. In Victoria, a standard sentence works as a guide for sentencing courts, while a maximum penalty sets the outer limit available for an offence.

Trial procedure would also change. Labor promised to amend the Evidence Act to prevent barristers using humiliating and invasive questioning of victim-survivors in court. It proposed allowing courts to consider patterns of sexual abuse as evidence at trial. Both measures concern how sexual offence cases are run and what material a jury or judicial officer can hear.

The broader context here is how the parts fit together. The pledge pairs wider liability at the front end with heavier penalties at the back end and new limits inside the courtroom. The new offences would test questions of causation, duty and foreseeability that courts already handle in manslaughter and neglect cases, but rarely in the family violence suicide setting. Higher maxima would leave discretion with judges while raising the ceiling. Changes to questioning rules and pattern evidence would affect trial strategy for prosecution and defence and the experience of complainants giving evidence.

In my view, drafting will matter most. Whether abandonment requires knowledge of injury, what form of assistance the law would demand, and how a pattern of abuse is defined for admissibility will determine how often the new provisions are charged and how they survive appellate scrutiny. The penalty pledges raise a separate question, since maximum sentences and standard sentences shape negotiation, sentencing submissions and appeals in different ways.