When separating parents turn to the family court to help resolve arrangements for their children, judges currently work from a starting point known as the presumption of parental involvement. First introduced in 2014, this principle suggests that—unless there is evidence to the contrary—a child generally benefits from the involvement of both parents in their life.
In late 2025, the government announced its intention to repeal this presumption. The decision has been met with a mixture of relief, concern and confusion, particularly from parents already navigating separation or considering the future of their child arrangements. Understanding what the change actually means—and what it doesn’t—can help families feel more informed and more confident as they move forward.
This article explains the background to the government’s announcement, why the change has been proposed, and what parents should expect going forward. It also explores how mediation can support families in reaching safe, child-focused agreements regardless of what happens in the courtroom.
Understanding the Current Law: What Is the Presumption of Contact?
The presumption of parental involvement was introduced with the intention of encouraging meaningful relationships between children and both of their parents after separation. The idea was not to guarantee contact, but to guide courts toward considering the involvement of both parents unless there were clear reasons not to.
Under the current law:
- The court starts from the assumption that a child benefits from involvement from both parents.
- The involvement considered does not have to be direct contact—it could be indirect or limited.
- Judges must then consider whether this involvement creates any risk of harm and adjust decisions accordingly.
The intention behind the law was to reduce conflict and emphasise the positive role that both parents can play. However, over the past decade, the presumption has become increasingly controversial.
Why the Government Plans to Remove the Presumption
Concerns Around Domestic Abuse Cases
The government’s decision follows several reviews, inquiries and reports focusing on how family courts handle cases involving domestic abuse. One of the most influential was the Ministry of Justice’s Harm Panel Report, which found that:
- There were inconsistencies in how the presumption was understood and applied.
- In some cases, courts placed too much emphasis on parental involvement, even where serious safeguarding concerns existed.
- Survivors of domestic abuse felt that their voices were not always fully heard.
Although the presumption was never intended to override safeguarding considerations, the concern has been that in practice, it sometimes overshadowed them.
Calls From Practitioners, Charities and Campaigners
Over the last few years, a growing number of organisations—including children’s charities, domestic abuse services and legal professionals—have argued for a change. They claim that:
- The presumption risks becoming a default that overshadows nuance.
- It may create pressure to allow contact even where significant concerns remain.
- Decisions should start from a clean slate, focused solely on the child’s individual circumstances.
As a result, the government has concluded that the presumption may no longer strike the right balance between encouraging parental engagement and safeguarding children.
What Will Actually Change?
The proposed repeal does not mean that contact with both parents will be discouraged, denied or treated as less important than it is today. Instead, it represents a shift in the starting point, not the end result.
1. Courts Will Not Begin With an Assumption
Rather than starting with the belief that a child benefits from both parents’ involvement, judges will start by looking at the case entirely from scratch.
2. The Focus Will Be Solely on the Child’s Best Interests
Every decision in the family court must already be made in the best interests of the child. Removing the presumption means:
- No automatic assumptions
- No starting point that needs to be “worked back” from
- Each case assessed entirely on its own merits
3. Safety and Welfare Will Take Clear Priority
This change reinforces what the law already requires: children’s safety and wellbeing come first.
This does not mean one parent will automatically be favoured over the other. Courts will continue to promote safe, meaningful relationships wherever appropriate.
What Does This Mean for Parents Right Now?
The government has stated that the repeal will happen “when parliamentary time allows.” This means the presumption still exists in law today.
However, changes like this often influence the thinking of judges even before the law is formally amended. Many courts may already be taking a more cautious, child-specific approach rather than relying on the existing presumption.
For parents, the key message is:
Decisions will continue to be guided by what is safest, most stable and most beneficial for your individual child—not by blanket assumptions.
This mirrors what most families aim for naturally: ensuring their child is supported, cared for and protected as they adjust to life after separation.
Will Contact Be Harder to Obtain?
In most families, the removal of the presumption is unlikely to dramatically change outcomes. Judges will still encourage safe, positive relationships with both parents wherever this is appropriate.
Children often benefit from meaningful relationships with both parents, and the courts recognise this.
However, what will change is the structure behind the decision-making:
- The court will not start by assuming involvement is beneficial.
- It will start by examining the realities of the child’s life.
- Evidence of risk or concerns may be given clearer weight from the outset.
For the vast majority of parents who can co-operate and prioritise their child’s welfare, outcomes are unlikely to shift significantly.
For families where there are serious safety concerns, the change may help ensure risk is properly explored at the earliest stage.
How This May Affect Parents in Dispute
For parents currently navigating separation or considering applying to the court, it is understandable to feel uncertain.
Here’s what the repeal does not mean:
- It does not mean courts will become biased against either parent.
- It does not mean contact will be restricted unless there is cause.
- It does not mean courts will discourage shared care or meaningful involvement.
What it does mean is:
- Parents will need to focus even more on evidence, communication and child-focused planning.
- Courts will place high importance on risk, stability and safeguarding.
- Parents may be encouraged more strongly to consider mediation before going to court.
How Mediation Can Help Families During This Change
Whether the presumption exists or not, mediation remains one of the most effective tools for resolving child arrangements without conflict.
1. Mediation Keeps the Focus on the Child
A good mediator guides you toward practical, balanced decisions that reflect your child’s needs—not assumptions, external pressures or legal expectations.
2. Mediation Is Quicker and More Flexible Than Court
Court processes can be slow, emotionally draining and unpredictable. Mediation allows families to reach agreements at their own pace and in their own way.
3. Mediation Supports Communication
Whatever changes occur in the law, parents who communicate well are better placed to create stable, supportive arrangements for their children.
4. Mediation Helps Avoid Escalating Conflict
When legal conversations become difficult, mediation offers a safe space to refocus on cooperation rather than confrontation.
5. Mediation Can Still Be Used Even If Court Becomes Necessary
If mediation is not successful—or not appropriate—attending a MIAMS meeting ensures you have the information you need before making a court application. This step remains essential regardless of changes to the presumption.
What Parents Should Do Now
If you are planning child arrangements or are already in dispute, there are several constructive steps you can take:
Stay Informed: Changes in family law develop slowly. Keeping up to date helps reduce worry and prevents confusion.
Focus on Your Child’s Needs: The courts—and mediators—will always focus on what is best for your individual child. Keeping this at the forefront helps guide decisions.
Consider Mediation Early: Mediation can help avoid court entirely, or at least narrow the issues that need judicial involvement.
Document Concerns and Keep Communication Clear: If safety issues exist, keep clear records. If communication is calm and positive, continue building on that foundation.
Avoid Making Assumptions: The removal of the presumption won’t necessarily impact your specific case. Outcomes will still depend heavily on your family’s unique circumstances.
Final Thoughts
The proposed repeal of the presumption of parental involvement represents a significant shift in the starting point of family court decision-making, but it does not signal an end to co-parenting or shared involvement. Instead, it marks a move toward a more nuanced, case-by-case approach where safety, risk and the child’s individual needs take clear priority.
For parents, the most important thing is this:
Your child’s wellbeing remains at the centre of every decision—whether made in court or through mediation.
Mediation continues to offer a constructive, child-focused way to navigate these conversations, helping families build agreements that support stability, security and positive long-term outcomes.