This content reflects observational insights and lived community experiences. It does not constitute legal advice — always consult a qualified professional for your specific circumstances.
Parents often treat contact as an entitlement that belongs to them personally, something they can claim or withhold as they see fit.
Contact is the child's right, not either parent's. The court's starting question is the child's welfare. Section 1(2A) Children Act 1989 currently presumes both parents' involvement benefits a child where safe. The government plans to repeal this via Clause 17 of the Courts and Tribunals Bill (Report stage 13 Oct 2026), but s.1(2A) remains in force until the Bill passes. This Insight may be updated following 13 October 2026 once the Bill's status is confirmed. The presumption was always rebuttable by evidence of risk. The law starts from the child's welfare, not a parent's entitlement.
This insight was contributed by someone who has been through the family court system. Bridge The Gap is deeply grateful to everyone who shares their experience — your honesty helps bridge the gap for the next person still in it.
Download the card and post it on Facebook, LinkedIn, or wherever you're active. Every share helps another litigant find this before their hearing.

The Gap?
"It's my right to see my child, or my right to stop the other parent seeing them."
Court Reality
Contact is the child's right, not either parent's. The court's starting question is the child's welfare. Section 1(2A) Children Act 1989 currently presumes both parents' involvement benefits a child where safe.
Seen a gap between what you thought and the reality? Share yours.
familycourtbridge.org
Navigating court alone?
A McKenzie Friend can help you make sense of this in the context of your own case.
Find your supportWe use essential cookies only, such as remembering this choice and keeping you signed in if you create an account. No tracking or analytics cookies are used.