The ‘momentous’ decision to remove the automatic assumption of parental involvement in family cases has been welcoming by the family law community with commentators applauding the move which protects children from preventable harm and renews public confidence in the courts.
Family law membership body Resolution said it welcomed changes which put the best interests of children ‘front and centre.’ Joanne Edwards from Resolution said
Having been part of the advisory group behind this Review, we’re pleased it recognises the potential harm to children caused by an automatic presumption of parental involvement.
“In our experience, although judges already consider these cases carefully in practice, this is a positive step towards a cultural shift. It is vital that children and parents are safe – and made to feel safe – within the family justice system. Our hope is that it will also lead to more positive conversations with parents around what they might expect from the family courts.
“We welcome the Review’s recognition that family justice practitioners make every effort to centre child welfare across their practice. Supporting parents to prioritise the best interests of their children is at the heart of Resolution’s Code of Practice, followed by our members, and the measures proposed in this Review should help them to do just that.”
Deborah Jeff, Partner and Head of the Divorce and Family department at Simkins LLP described the decision as ‘long overdue.’
“The existing presumption of parental involvement can result in children of abusive parents being the subject of extended litigation, effectively allowing the court process to be used as a vehicle for ongoing abuse.” This change marks a decisive shift away from prioritising the rights of parents and towards child safety and wellbeing. Lawyers can now re-orientate around this long-awaited, child-centred approach to justice.”
Sally Robinson, partner in the family team at HCR Law agreed adding:
“The decision is considered a victory for those campaigning for victims of domestic abuse. With the presumption of parental involvement in place, predatory parents and those perpetrating abuse can use the family court system to retain control and in some instances, terrorise their former partners. Simply being a parent does not mean a person will be a positive influence in a child’s life.
The change means that the court can put children’s welfare and safety firmly at the centre of their decision, rather than having to weigh it against the legal presumption of parental involvement which can lead to children not being afforded the protection they need. There will still be a high bar to get over for a court to decide against parental involvement and such decision is likely to be preserved to those cases of proven domestic abuse and harm. The change though, should reduce the instances of children being placed in potentially unsafe situations and subsequent harm they may suffer from a parent. For these reasons, I would support this decision.”
Carolina Marín Pedreño, Partner and Head of the Children Department at Dawson Cornwell, said the decision was an ‘important moment in family law:
“Since the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, we have recognised children as subjects of rights in their own capacity, not extensions of their parents. This signals a long-overdue shift from a parent-focused framework to one rooted in children’s rights. It reflects the UN Convention’s fundamental message: children are not possessions to be shared, but individuals whose welfare and voices must be at the heart of every decision. For decades, the presumption of parental involvement has risked overshadowing the child’s own rights and lived experiences. This reform realigns the law with the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child – recognising children as subjects of rights, entitled to safety, dignity, and a voice in their own future.”
Other professionals warn of unintended consequences which could include false allegations of domestic abuse in order to frustrate the other parent’s access to their children. “There is a risk that this could open the floodgates” said Rebecca Broom, a solicitor in the family team at HCR Law. “It will be key that this is closely monitored, with strong fact-finding and robust safeguards in place. If implemented effectively, the reform should increase protection for children whilst also maintaining public confidence in the family courts.”
Kirsty Morris, a partner at Burgess Mee, shared the sentiment adding:
“This move makes it even more important that professionals such as lawyers, judges and social workers fully understand the signs and potential impact of different forms of abuse within families and operate with a trauma-informed approach. It is essential that the new legislation balances the protection of parents and children who are at risk of abuse with safeguards to ensure that in cases where there isn’t abuse, this isn’t used as a means of restricting parental involvement, which might be considered a retrograde step.”
Despite the risks, the ‘presumption of parental involvement has often conflicted with the need to prioritise a child’s welfare. Removing this presumption sends a clear and powerful message: a child’s safety must always come first’ concluded Victoria Cannon, Partner and Head of Family Law, Hugh James.
“This is a landmark step in placing children’s safety at the heart of family law. It reinforces that a child’s right to feel safe and secure should always take precedence over a parent’s right to contact.”
