When relationships turn sour—whether it’s a messy divorce, a heated custody battle, or a case of domestic violence—courts sometimes step in with restraining orders to keep people safe. But what happens when a judge issues a mutual restraining order that applies to both people involved? Does it actually help, or does it cause more harm than good?
In this post, we’ll break down what a mutual restraining order is, when it’s used, and whether it truly protects both parties or creates more problems.
What Is a Mutual Restraining Order?
What is a mutual restraining order? A mutual restraining order is a legal order issued by a court that places restrictions on both parties involved in a dispute. Unlike a standard restraining order, which is typically filed by one person against another, a mutual restraining order applies to both individuals equally. This means that both people must follow the same rules, such as:
- Not contacting each other through phone, email, text, or social media
- Staying a certain distance apart, such as 500 feet or more
- Avoiding any threats, harassment, or acts of violence
- Not showing up at the other person’s home, workplace, or school
In theory, mutual restraining orders are meant to reduce conflict and prevent both individuals from escalating a dispute. However, they are controversial because they can sometimes unfairly punish victims and create legal complications.
How Is a Mutual Restraining Order Issued?
There are two main ways a mutual restraining order can be put in place:
1. Voluntary Agreement
In some cases, both parties might agree to a mutual restraining order to avoid further conflict. This could happen in situations where:
- A couple going through a difficult breakup wants to legally enforce their separation.
- Two family members involved in a dispute decide they need space from each other.
- A custody battle has become heated, and both parents agree to avoid each other outside of necessary legal proceedings.
When both individuals agree to the order, it must still be approved by a judge to become legally enforceable.
2. Court-Ordered Mutual Restraining Orders
If both individuals in a dispute accuse each other of harassment, threats, or violence, a judge may decide to issue a mutual restraining order. However, courts don’t grant these orders automatically—they usually require strong evidence that both parties have engaged in harmful behavior.
For example, in New York and New Jersey, a judge must make separate findings that each person has committed acts that justify a restraining order. This prevents situations where an abuser falsely claims that the victim was also abusive just to get a mutual order in place.
Do Courts Automatically Issue Mutual Restraining Orders?
No. Many states, including New York and New Jersey, do not automatically issue mutual restraining orders just because both people claim they were harmed.
In fact, New York courts follow a strict standard for issuing these orders. According to New York Family Court Act § 842, a court can only issue an order of protection against a person if there is evidence that they committed a family offense, such as:
- Assault or attempted assault
- Stalking
- Harassment
- Menacing or threats
- Criminal mischief (damaging property)
For a mutual restraining order to be issued, the court must find that both people committed these offenses separately. This rule is in place to prevent abusers from manipulating the legal system by falsely accusing their victims to get a mutual order.
In New Jersey, the Prevention of Domestic Violence Act of 1991 (N.J.S.A. 2C:25-17) requires courts to consider evidence carefully before issuing any restraining order. A judge must look at:
- The history of violence or harassment between the individuals
- Whether one person is more at risk than the other
- If the request for a mutual restraining order is being used to gain leverage in a custody battle or divorce case
Why Would a Judge Deny a Mutual Restraining Order?
A judge may refuse to issue a mutual restraining order if:
- One person does not have a valid reason to be restrained.
- There is no evidence of wrongdoing by both parties.
- It appears that one person is the real victim and the other is using legal tactics to cover their own actions.
This is especially important in domestic violence cases. Many advocacy groups warn that mutual restraining orders can be used as a tool by abusers to weaken a victim’s legal standing. If a victim is falsely accused and placed under a mutual restraining order, it can affect their ability to:
- Seek further legal protection
- Get custody of their children
- Defend themselves without breaking the order
How Can Someone Challenge a Mutual Restraining Order?
If a person believes a mutual restraining order was unfairly issued, they can:
- Gather evidence – This could include texts, emails, medical records, police reports, or witness statements that show they were not the aggressor.
- File an appeal – In many states, a restraining order can be appealed in a higher court if there’s reason to believe it was issued unfairly.
- Hire an attorney – Family law attorneys can help argue against a mutual restraining order if it places an unfair burden on the wrong person.
When Are Mutual Restraining Orders Useful?
While mutual restraining orders can be problematic, there are times when they are appropriate, such as:
- Both people are equally responsible for the conflict – If both individuals have engaged in threatening behavior, a mutual order can create legal boundaries to prevent further issues.
- There is a history of back-and-forth disputes – In cases where both people repeatedly harass or threaten each other, a mutual order might help prevent further escalation.
- Both parties want space from each other – In some divorces or business disputes, mutual restraining orders are used as a way to create distance between two individuals.
Mutual restraining orders can be helpful in some situations, but they are often misused or unfairly applied. If you are facing a mutual restraining order—or if you are seeking protection but are worried about getting one placed against you—it’s important to understand your legal rights.
At Krasner Law, we practice in family law cases, including restraining orders, custody disputes, and domestic violence cases. Our experienced team can help you navigate the legal process and help make sure your rights are protected.
If you’re dealing with a restraining order situation, don’t face it alone. Reach out to Krasner Law for a consultation, and let us help you find the best path forward.
Do Mutual Restraining Orders Actually Help?
Mutual restraining orders are sometimes seen as a fair solution when two people are in conflict. But they come with serious risks.
While they can be useful in some situations, they are not always the best option. This is especially true in cases of domestic violence.
Understanding when a mutual restraining order is appropriate—and when it could cause harm—is important for anyone in a legal dispute.
Below, we’ll explore both the benefits and risks of mutual restraining orders.
We’ll also cover when other legal options might be a better choice.
Ways a Mutual Restraining Order Might Help
There are certain situations where a mutual restraining order can be useful. Courts might issue them when both people have made serious accusations against each other, or if they’ve engaged in ongoing conflicts that need to be legally addressed.
1. It Keeps Things Fair
If both individuals have engaged in aggressive or harmful behavior—whether through physical violence, threats, or harassment—a mutual restraining order prevents either party from taking advantage of the other.
For example, if a couple going through a contentious divorce has had multiple heated confrontations, a mutual restraining order can prevent both parties from contacting or threatening each other.
2. It Prevents Things From Getting Worse
When emotions run high, there’s always a risk that things could escalate into more serious legal issues—or even violence. A mutual restraining order helps set clear boundaries to prevent further disputes.
This is especially important in cases where both individuals have a history of retaliating against each other. By legally preventing contact, the court can help stop arguments from turning into more serious legal or physical altercations.
3. It Encourages Legal Resolution
In some cases, mutual restraining orders help push both parties toward a formal legal resolution. When a court order is in place, both people are more likely to focus on legal solutions, such as:
- Divorce settlements
- Child custody agreements
- Mediation or arbitration
A mutual restraining order can provide the space and legal enforcement needed for these processes to move forward without additional conflict.
The Downsides of Mutual Restraining Orders
While mutual restraining orders may seem fair, they can actually harm the wrong person, especially when one individual is the victim and the other is the aggressor. Here’s why:
1. They Can Punish Victims
One of the biggest concerns with mutual restraining orders is that they can treat victims and abusers as equals. If one person is truly the victim and the other is the aggressor, a mutual order wrongfully implies that both people are at fault.
For example, if a victim of domestic violence defends themselves against their abuser, the abuser might file for a restraining order to make it look like both people were equally responsible. This can make it harder for the real victim to get help.
2. They Send the Wrong Message
A mutual restraining order can make it seem like both individuals share equal blame—even if one person was simply trying to protect themselves.
This can have serious consequences, especially in custody battles. If a domestic violence victim is placed under a mutual restraining order, the court might view them as unstable or equally responsible for the conflict—even if they were only trying to defend themselves or seek protection.
3. They Are Harder to Enforce
Mutual restraining orders can be confusing for law enforcement. If police are called to respond to a situation involving a mutual order, they may have difficulty determining who violated the order.
For example, if one party harasses the other and the victim calls the police, the victim could also be arrested simply for interacting with the other person—even though they were the one seeking protection.
This can lead to unfair arrests and wrongful criminal charges.
4. They Limit Legal Options
If a victim needs more protection in the future, a mutual restraining order can make it harder for them to file additional legal actions.
For example:
- A victim might hesitate to call the police out of fear that they will also be punished.
- It may be harder for the victim to request sole custody of a child in family court.
- The victim could be denied access to shelters or support services because of the legal record.
This is why many domestic violence advocacy groups argue that mutual restraining orders should not be used in domestic violence cases unless there is strong evidence that both individuals are equally responsible for the conflict.
When Should a Mutual Restraining Order Be Used?
Because of the risks involved, mutual restraining orders should only be used when there is clear evidence that both people have engaged in aggressive, harmful, or illegal behavior.
Courts Will Look at Factors Like:
- Police reports or witness statements – Official records of past incidents.
- Medical records or photos of injuries – Proof of physical harm.
- The history of conflict between the two people – Any past legal disputes or altercations.
- Whether both people have made legitimate complaints – If one person has a history of false accusations, the court may deny a mutual order.
Many states, including New York and New Jersey, require separate findings of abuse before a mutual restraining order is issued. This means that a judge must determine that both individuals have committed acts of violence, harassment, or threats—independent of each other.
Are There Better Alternatives to Mutual Restraining Orders?
In many cases, there are better legal options that offer more protection without the risks of a mutual restraining order. Some alternatives include:
1. Separate Restraining Orders
Instead of issuing one mutual order, a judge can issue separate restraining orders for each person. This helps make sure that each case is judged fairly and that a victim is not unfairly placed under legal restrictions.
2. No-Contact Agreements
In non-violent disputes—such as divorce or business conflicts—both individuals may agree to a voluntary no-contact agreement. This is not a legal order but a mutual understanding that they will avoid contact without police involvement.
3. Mediation or Family Court Interventions
If the issue is more about ongoing conflict rather than safety, the court may suggest:
- Mediation – A neutral third party helps both individuals find a resolution.
- Supervised exchanges – If child custody is involved, arrangements can be made so that both parents do not have direct contact when exchanging custody.
These alternatives provide legal protection and clear boundaries without putting a victim in a harmful legal situation.
Final Thoughts: Do Mutual Restraining Orders Protect or Harm?
Mutual restraining orders might seem like an easy way to settle disputes, but they don’t always work as intended. In some cases, they protect both parties fairly. But in others—especially in domestic violence situations—they can actually put victims at a disadvantage and create legal complications.
If you’re dealing with a situation that involves restraining orders, family disputes, or custody battles, it’s important to get legal guidance. Krasner Law practices in family law and can help you navigate these complex issues with care.
Need legal advice? Contact us today to discuss your case and explore the best options for your situation.
