The Government’s decision to repeal the presumption of parental involvement under section 1 of the Children Act 1989 signals a major change designed to protect children who are the subjects of the family court from harm.
This change will apply to cases where the courts are considering whether to make an order in respect of parental responsibility or to make, vary or discharge a child arrangements order under section 8 of the Act.
The announcement follows the Government’s Review of the Presumption of Parental Involvement, published in 2020, which concluded that the existing system was not fit for purpose. The review identified serious shortcomings and called for urgent reform to ensure that children are protected from harm.
What the change means for families and clients
Under the current law, the court starts with the presumption under section 1(2A), (2B) and (6) of the Children Act 1989 that a parent’s involvement in a child’s life will further that child’s welfare, except where there is evidence that such involvement would place the child at risk of significant harm.
The term “involvement” refers to any form of direct or indirect contact such as telephone calls, cards or gifts. While the law allows for exceptions in cases involving abuse, the government’s review found that the presumption has often been interpreted too rigidly. This has, at times, resulted in unsafe contact arrangements for children who have witnessed abuse and for survivors of domestic abuse. The repeal will make clear that there is no automatic assumption that involvement in a child’s life is beneficial. Instead, judges will be required to consider every case on its individual facts, guided by a single principle: a child’s right to safety and wellbeing comes first.
Case Study: Real-Life Implications
In one case, the Family Law team at Hugh James supported a mother whose former partner had been convicted of sexual offences against children. Despite the conviction, under the current law, the presumption that a father should have contact with his child still applied. This understandably caused the mother significant distress.
If the presumption has been removed, the court could have considered an application under section 8 to restrict or limit parental responsibility. Instead, the father was permitted indirect contact with the child, a decision that was unavoidable under existing law but deeply upsetting for the family involved. The court had taken the view that the father should still be involved in the child’s life even though direct contact was limited.
Looking Ahead: Putting Children’s Welfare First
The repeal is, in my view, a landmark moment in the evolution of family law. It sends a clear message that a child’s right to feel safe and secure must always come before a parent’s right to spend time with a child. The court should not have to battle with two conflicting principles.
It represents a long-overdue and vital step towards creating a safer, more balanced system that truly protects families and places children’s welfare at the heart of family law.
There is not yet a confirmed timeframe for when the change will take effect, but the Ministry of Justice has indicated that legislation to repeal the presumption will be introduced as soon as parliamentary time allows. It is my hope that this will be prioritised with the urgency it rightly deserves.
For parents who have experienced domestic abuse, this announcement offers hope of a system that listens, believes, and prioritises safety above all else. It should also help relieve the anxiety many survivors feel about being forced into unsafe contact arrangements.
This reform is a reminder of what family law should always be about: protecting children, supporting families, and ensuring that decisions around contact with children made by the courts reflects the risks and the need for safety and stability.
Victoria Cannon is Partner and Head of Family Law at Hugh James
