On 22 October 2025, the Government announced their plan to repeal the presumption of parental involvement from the Children Act 1989. Campaigning for this change was spearheaded by Claire Throssell, whose children Jack and Paul were tragically killed by their abusive father 11 years ago.
Key takeaways
- Currently, courts work on the principle that children should have contact with both parents unless there is evidence that a parent could put the child at risk of harm.
- Once this legislative change is made, Family Court judges will no longer have to work from a starting point that parental involvement is in the child’s best interest. Instead, they will be directed to consider the evidence and assess a child’s wellbeing on a case-by-case basis.
New report by Domestic Abuse Commissioner highlights failings of Family Courts to protect victims of abuse
This is welcome news against the backdrop of the latest report from the Domestic Abuse Commissioner, which highlights failings in the Family Courts to identify and respond to allegations of domestic abuse in child arrangement cases, with the report highlighting that there is a deeply ingrained pro-contact culture in the Family Courts.
The Family Court Review and Reporting Mechanism (FCRRM) pilot study, which gathered and evaluated data from three courts in England and Wales last year, revealed that domestic abuse was found in 87% of case file reviews and in during 73% of hearings. Despite this, however, it was only considered a relevant factor in 42% of hearings – and so sidelined in many cases. This builds on the damning findings in the 2020 Harm Panel report , which unveiled ‘deep-seated and systematic issues’ that put children and adult domestic abuse victims at risk in the family court system. The Everyday Business report shows that very little has changed.
Key issues
- A deeply ingrained pro-contact culture still dominates the system, which means that children are often required to maintain contact with an abusive parent. Nearly all victim-survivors reported that professionals told them that contact would go ahead irrespective of abuse. In fact, many were discouraged from raising allegations, believing it would make no difference to the outcome.
- Adversarial processes mean victim-survivors don’t know how to make a case within the complex legal rules, or feel that that they were disadvantaged by the process, which favoured their perpetrators.
- Resource constraints remain a serious concern. With limited court time and mounting delays, there is growing pressure to move cases through as quickly as possible. Victim-survivors can find themselves repeating their stories over and over again, reliving traumatic experiences instead of finding closure and support.
- Siloed working. Too often, agencies operate in isolation, with poor co-ordination and inadequate data sharing, leaving survivors caught between systems that should be working together.
Lessons for Employers
Although the new research does not focus directly on the role of employers, it offers important lessons for organisations supporting employees affected by domestic abuse.
- Employees impacted by domestic abuse who have children may face years of Family Court proceedings. These place a significant demand on the employee’s time. Offering flexibility and support during this time is vital. EIDA Ambassador, Andrew Lane, shares his top tips for employers to support employees here.
- Court proceedings can retraumatise victim-survivors and make them feel silenced or disbelieved.
- Employers should proactively work to create a culture of trust and openness in the workplace to empower and support all employees. A coordinated, organisation-wide approach to domestic abuse can make a vital difference in ensuring employees get the help they need. Employers can draw on the practical guidance and tools EIDA offers to strengthen their response and create a safer, more supportive workplace.
