• Sectors we work in banner(2)

    Quick Reads

Government announces the repeal of the presumption of parental involvement

The Government has announced that they will repeal the presumption of parental involvement, when parliamentary time allows. The presumption is enshrined in the Children Act 1989. The court, when considering making, varying or discharging certain orders for children, is to presume that, unless the contrary is shown, the involvement of a parent in the child’s life will further their welfare. 

However, crucially, once the presumption is repealed, judges will no longer have a starting point that parental involvement is in the child’s best interests. They will now be directed to review the evidence and assess a child’s wellbeing in line with the circumstances of each case.

The Government has outlined that new evidence shows that always prioritising contact between a child and a parent can ‘perpetuate child abuse in the worst cases’ and, “If parents are thought to be a threat to their child’s safety, involvement in their lives can be restricted, for example through courts ordering supervised contact, involvement limited to written communication, or by ordering that there should be no involvement at all.”

The presumption has been a source of controversy in cases where there is domestic abuse or allegations of domestic abuse. The Ministry of Justice’s 2020 Harm Panel report examined the statutory presumption of parental involvement and called for an ‘urgent review’ of the presumption to assess the impact on cases and emphasised that child safety must take precedence over contact.

Since the Harm Panel report we have seen the enactment of the Domestic Abuse Act 2021 and the establishment of the statutory office of the Domestic Abuse Commissioner – with the remit to make recommendations for reform and promote good practice in the prevention of domestic abuse, where children can be victims in their own right.

Notwithstanding some positive strides, domestic abuse campaigners have fought for further reform over many years to protect children and survivors of domestic abuse. The presumption and ‘pro contact culture’ was also highlighted as a risk factor in the Domestic Abuse Commissioner’s October 2025 report, highlighting: “Nearly all survivors said that they were often made to feel that domestic abuse was irrelevant to contact because the professionals indicated that contact would go ahead irrespective of any abuse. Survivors described being discouraged from raising allegations of domestic abuse by Cafcass, the courts, and, sometimes, their own lawyer (if they had one), because contact would be ordered regardless”.

Whilst the Government has not committed to a timeframe in respect of the repeal, and parliamentary time is very limited, it is positive that a formal announcement has been made and this may also allow the presumption to be challenged (prior to the parliamentary repeal) in relevant proceedings. The full Government release can be read here: Government action to protect children from abusive parents - GOV.UK

The repeal is based on the clear principle that every child deserves to be safe. New evidence published today shows that assuming it is always in the best interest of a child to have the involvement of both parents might perpetuate abuse.

Our thinking

  • Sharing the Season – the child-focused approach to Christmas

    Rebecca Arnold

    Quick Reads

  • Jamie Cartwright writes for Independent Schools Magazine on how VAT on private school fees is shaping the future of the independent education sector

    Jamie Cartwright

    In the Press

  • Magnum spins out of Unilever: a clearer investment story but a cool valuation

    Iwan Thomas

    Quick Reads

  • Licence to Till: what happens when a ‘Grazing Licence’ is really a tenancy? Accidental tenancies, shams and documents that just don’t do what they say on the tin…

    Maddie Dunn

    Insights

  • Georgina Muskett writes for Property Week on the conundrum of green leasing

    Georgina Muskett

    In the Press

  • Paramount launches hostile bid for the entirety of Warner Bros

    Grace Hudson

    Quick Reads

  • Property Patter: Top 5 Changes under the new Renters’ Rights Act 2025

    Lauren Fraser

    Podcasts

  • DMCCA: What the UK’s new consumer rules now mean for consumer facing businesses

    Mark Dewar

    Insights

  • Transactions at an undervalue: trusts of land

    Roger Elford

    Insights

  • Ministry of Sound Limited v. The British Foreign Wharf Company Limited (and ors): Balancing terms of a renewal lease with redevelopment potential

    Grace O'Leary

    Quick Reads

  • Charles Russell Speechlys advises FIRST and its shareholders on sale to Encore

    Mark Howard

    News

  • Helliwell v Entwistle – the (actual) conclusion!

    Sarah Jane Boon

    Quick Reads

  • Charles Russell Speechlys advises longstanding client Puma Growth Partners on its investment in HubBox

    Ashwin Pillay

    News

  • Candy Kittens takes a bite as Unilever slims down

    Iwan Thomas

    Quick Reads

  • Autumn Budget 2025 – Inheritance Tax (IHT) and charitable gifts

    Richard Honey

    Insights

  • Advocacy: Lessons from The Mandela Brief for International Arbitration Today

    Jue Jun Lu

    Events

  • The Times, City AM and the Daily Mail quote Dan Pollard on government plans to remove the cap on unfair dismissal claims

    Dan Pollard

    In the Press

  • Promises and probate: when is “detriment” worth the family farm and what happens when a promise is only relied on for a defined period?

    Matthew Clark

    Insights

  • Pro bono costs orders in children proceedings

    Sarah Higgins

    Quick Reads

  • Retail Showcase - Festive Special

    Events

Back to top