- within Family and Matrimonial topic(s)
- in United States
- within Transport topic(s)
On 22 October 2025, the Ministry of Justice announced its intention to remove the statutory presumption that it is in a child's best interests for both parents to be involved in their life. This announcement followed a government-led review of the presumption and is set out in the Ministry of Justice's Presumption of Parental Involvement Review: Final Report.
The proposed reform represents a significant shift in the approach to child arrangements within the family justice system, particularly in cases involving domestic abuse.
What is the statutory presumption?
Since 2014, the law in England and Wales has contained a statutory presumption that a child's welfare is best served by the involvement of both parents in their life, whether that involvement is direct or indirect. As a result, when courts consider whether to make child arrangements orders - particularly concerning contact with a non-resident parent - this presumption has acted as an important guiding principle, often weighing in favour of maintaining parental involvement.
The presumption is set out in section 1(2A) of the Children Act 1989, which provides that:
"A court... is to presume, unless the contrary is shown, that involvement of that parent in the life of the child concerned will further the child's welfare."
While the child's welfare has always remained the court's paramount consideration, the presumption has played a role in shaping judicial decision-making over the past decade.
Why was change considered necessary?
The application of the statutory presumption has been the subject of sustained criticism, particularly in cases involving allegations or findings of domestic abuse. Concerns have centred on situations where courts are required to determine whether a parent who has perpetrated domestic abuse should have contact with their child.
Section 1(6)(b) of the Children Act 1989 states that the presumption does not apply if a parent's involvement "would put the child at risk of suffering harm." In practice, this provision is intended to displace the presumption in cases where contact would be unsafe. However, critics argue that the presumption nonetheless leaves significant discretion to the court and may continue to exert an indirect influence on decisions, even where domestic abuse is present.
It has been suggested that this framework can result in contact orders being made despite clear risks, potentially exposing children to further harm, either through direct abuse or by witnessing abuse against the resident parent. Importantly, both scenarios are now recognised as forms of domestic abuse, with children treated as direct victims rather than mere bystanders.
In its final report, the Ministry of Justice acknowledged these concerns, noting that "assumptions about child welfare could drive decision making and an individualised focus on the welfare of each child could be lost." The review concluded that the presumption may, in some cases, undermine a genuinely child-centred assessment of risk and welfare.
What will change look like?
Although no formal timetable has yet been confirmed for legislative reform, the removal of the statutory presumption is expected to encourage a more holistic and child-focused approach to decision-making in child arrangements cases. Without a starting assumption in favour of parental involvement, courts may be better positioned to assess each case on its individual facts, with greater emphasis on safeguarding and the lived experience of the child.
It is anticipated that this shift will lead to increased protection for children in cases involving domestic abuse and a reduced risk of court-ordered contact with parents who pose a danger to their welfare.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
