← Back to Westminster Hall Debates
Child Contact Arrangements
10 June 2026
Lead MP
Alison Hume
Responding Minister
Catherine Atkinson
Tags
Crime & Law EnforcementJustice & CourtsTaxationEmploymentChildren & Families
Word Count: 4105
Other Contributors: 5
At a Glance
Alison Hume raised concerns about child contact arrangements in Westminster Hall. A government minister responded.
Key Requests to Government:
I urge the Government to introduce a statutory presumption in the Courts and Tribunals Bill that prioritises the voice of the child and ensures allegations of abuse are given more weight than counter-claims of parental alienation. This would prevent harm and ensure children's voices carry the evidential weight they deserve.
How the Debate Unfolded
MPs spoke in turn to share their views and ask questions. Here's what each person said:
Lead Contributor
Opened the debate
I am concerned about the high prevalence of domestic abuse allegations in family court cases, with estimates suggesting up to 62% of private law cases under the Children Act 1989 involve claims of abuse. Unregulated experts often play a significant role and their decisions can be detrimental to mothers and children, particularly when counter-allegations of parental alienation are made without proper scrutiny. In one case, a mother was disbelieved after alleging domestic abuse and had her children removed from her care despite evidence of abuse.
Jim Shannon
DUP
Strangford
Commends Alison Hume for securing the debate, mentioning that while elements of the Courts and Tribunals Bill were difficult to support, it sought to address a child's consent in contact arrangements. Argues that the Government must consider these changes outside the bill if necessary.
Newbury
It is true that the Government do not recognise parental alienation and the syndrome, but courts too often do. A report released yesterday by Right to Equality found that over 70% of family court judgments use victim-blaming language.
Thanks Alison Hume for bringing up parental alienation accusations against mothers and supports campaigns by Right to Equality, Women's Aid, and Hague Mothers. Emphasises that courts should believe a mother when she says her child is not safe.
Paul Holmes
Lab
Sheffield Central
I highlighted concerns about unregulated experts in family courts, noting that some lack proper qualifications and can lead to unjust outcomes for mothers and children. I also noted the need for reforms to address parental alienation claims properly.
Endorses Alison Hume's calls for reform in family courts and asks if the hon. Lady supports his call for Government support for family contact centres, highlighting the work of the Woking Family Contact Centre in his constituency.
Government Response
Catherine Atkinson
Government Response
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dr Murrison. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Scarborough and Whitby (Alison Hume) and commend her for securing such an important debate. Reflecting on the stories shared in the debate—of children feeling unheard and of families in anguish—I pay tribute to my hon. Friend's determination and persistence in bringing these issues to light, especially concerning the need for children's voices to be heard and believed when they say that they have experienced abuse. I assure my hon. Friend that the child's welfare will be the court's paramount consideration as enshrined in section 1 of the Children Act 1989. The family courts must consider the clear wishes and feelings of the child concerned. We do not recognise parental alienation syndrome, but we have important guidance from the Family Justice Council to assist courts in handling cases of justified reasons why a child might fear or reject contact with a parent due to abuse. I welcome the work being undertaken by the Family Justice Council at the invitation of the former president of the family division to consider whether an alternative and more appropriate procedural approach is needed in cases where unregulated parental alienation experts have been instructed. Encouraging progress includes a toolkit released in March for judges on how to write to children, strengthening engagement with CAFCASS Cymru staff and including representatives of the Family Justice Young People's Board in meetings of the Family Justice Board. We are rolling out a child-focused model nationally over the next three years, which centres on the needs and views of children at the start of every case through direct engagement with the parties, relevant agencies and the children themselves, resulting in cases resolved about twice as fast as the national average. Concerning wider reform, we are repealing the presumption of parental involvement from the Children Act 1989, restricting the exercise of an offender's parental responsibility in serious child sexual abuse cases or when a child is born of rape through the Victims and Courts Act 2026, and implementing Jade's law by the end of the year. Every child who comes into contact with the family justice system deserves protection, to be heard, and for their welfare to be put above everything else.
▸
Assessment & feedback
Summary accuracy
About Westminster Hall Debates
Westminster Hall debates are a chance for MPs to raise important issues affecting their constituents and get a response from a government minister. Unlike Prime Minister's Questions, these debates are more in-depth and collaborative. The MP who secured the debate speaks first, other MPs can contribute, and a minister responds with the government's position.