South Australia is proposing to ban perpetrators of domestic and sexual violence from dating apps

Get 25% off for 1 year

The proposed nation-first move that could finally transfer responsibility from those using the apps, to the convicted perpetrators who have been proven to cause harm. But Alysha Gray explores, will this actually work?

On the 13th of July, South Australia’s Attorney General, and Deputy Premier, Kyam Maher unveiled proposed legislation that would prohibit convicted domestic violence perpetrators and registered sex offenders from using dating apps.

The government’s proposal is being developed in consultation with dating conglomerate Match Group, the parent company of Tinder, Hinge, Match.com and OkCupid, and importantly alongside victim-survivor advocates. While the exact criteria are yet to be announced, under the planned legislation, offenders could face a default ban of at least 10 years, while those convicted of the most serious crimes, could face lifetime bans from online dating platforms. Knowingly breaching the ban could carry a penalty of five years imprisonment.

The proposal represents a significant attempt to shift responsibility for dating app safety away from users, and onto the people causing harm, while placing greater accountability on an industry that has historically operated with little regulatory oversight.

It comes amid growing concerns regarding safety on dating apps. A 2022 Australian Institute of Criminology report that found approximately 72%, or almost three-quarters, of Australian dating app users had experienced some form of online sexual harassment, aggression, or violence from a ‘match’ within the last 5 years. Alongside this, one-in-three respondents stated they have been subject to in-person domestic, sexual, or family violence via someone they met online. More than three million Australians, including around 200,000 South Australians, use dating apps at any given time. While these platforms make meeting new people easier and more accessible, they have also created an enormous, largely unregulated environment where harm can occur. It is no surprise that governments and dating platforms alike are under increasing pressure to improve user safety.

Australia is living through a domestic violence epidemic; 4 women were allegedly killed by a current or former partner in the week of the bill’s announcement. And while there is no complete or verified register of family violence deaths, at the time of writing this piece, most organisations (including Destroy the Joint and Australian Femicide Watch) had reported at least 27 women, and 13 children had lost their lives to family violence in 2026.

How Could it Operate?

The proposed model draws on the principles underpinning South Australia’s Working with Children Check framework. Rather than requiring dating platforms to identify offenders themselves, the proposal places the legal obligation on offenders to disclose their conviction status when creating an account or stay off the apps altogether.

It is a sensible starting point for a first-of-its-kind proposal. While many may argue this won’t do enough, it would mean users are not left waiting for technology companies to develop detection systems – allowing for a faster rollout. Alongside this, it avoids many of the privacy concerns we’ve seen elsewhere, especially during the teen social media ban – mass data mining, data leaks and online surveillance – by relying on an existing legal framework rather than new technology. However, that same design is also the proposal’s greatest weakness: it only works if offenders choose to comply with the law.

Identity verification remains inconsistent across dating platforms. Many dating apps still do not require government-issued identification or routine criminal background checks for users creating an account. A verification, which many users understandably assume signals safety, typically confirms only that someone resembles their profile photos. A law that criminalises a breach in conditions for a previous conviction cannot prevent the first match from occurring. This bill will become a deterrent, not a filter.

Will It Actually Work?

South Australian policymakers have been upfront that many of the operational details are still being developed; an acknowledgement that enforcement is likely to be this legislation’s greatest challenge. Sarah Quick, South Australia’s Commissioner for Victims’ Rights, admitted implementation won’t be easy, but added: “I certainly don’t think that’s a reason not to try. We have a responsibility to ensure these apps are as safe as possible.”

Survivor-advocate Leesa Scanlan put it perfectly: “This is one piece of a much larger puzzle... alongside education, early intervention, further legal reform and improving reporting pathways.” This proposal shouldn’t be dismissed simply because it will be difficult to enforce - most significant reforms face implementation challenges in their early stages. Realistically, compliance is likely to be mixed. Some offenders will obey the law. I fear many won’t.

My concerns are practical. A banned offender could sign up under a false name and different photos or create new accounts frequently to dodge reporting – the same evasion tactics already common in online catfishing and identity fraud. This would leave other users being unable to verify, or accurately report, who they have been matching with. Enforcement may also end up relying on victims, friends, or bystanders to recognise an offender and report them, meaning breaches may not be caught until harm has already occurred – shifting the burden of enforcement back onto the very people this law is meant to protect.

Reforms addressing domestic, sexual, and family violence (DSFV) tend to attract a predictable strain of criticism, usually framed around false allegations and the fear innocent people will be unfairly implicated. This law may face the same. But it is worth saying, at this stage, this law only applies to those convicted of a crime, not accused, and it applies regardless of gender. A man victimised by a partner or targeted by an offender on a dating app will also be protected.

What gives me hope is that, for years, responsibility for safety on dating apps has sat almost entirely with users – told to swipe carefully, verify your date, and report anything suspicious or harmful. This proposal is a first step toward shifting responsibility back onto those who cause harm, while pushing the platforms to take a more active role in protecting people who use them. Match Group’s willingness to engage with survivor-advocates and the government is encouraging, and worth acknowledging; however, whether this commitment will translate into meaningful, sustained practice remains uncertain.

I am also hopeful it leads to more than a shift in enforcement on paper; that it helps open broader public conversation about domestic, sexual, and family violence, and reduces the unfair stigma still carried by some victim-survivors who were targeted through these apps.

Will this proposal eliminate offenders from dating apps? No. Will it fully resolve the problem of offenders using online dating platforms to find new victims? No. To be fair, I don’t think the South Australian Government is claiming it will.

But as the first serious attempt to regulate an industry that has operated for years with minimal oversight, it matters. Whether it succeeds will hinge on details we don’t yet have: which offences trigger the strongest bans, how disclosure will be verified, how breaches will be detected, and whether dating platforms remain willing partners if their legal responsibilities expand. Get these details wrong and the reform risks becoming symbolic. Get them right, by listening to survivors, and South Australia could establish a model the rest of the world chooses to follow.

If you, or anyone you know needs support, please contact 1800 RESPECT (1800 737 732). 1800Respect is the National Sexual Assault, Domestic and Family Violence Counselling Service. If you are in immediate danger, call 000.

Alysha Gray is a PhD candidate at the University of Queensland where her research explores gender equality, dating and relationships, and sexuality. She holds a Bachelor of Psychological Science with First Class Honours. She believes good research should be accessible to all and wants her work to make real change in the lives of women and girls.