Family law places a high priority on the welfare and best interests of children, and they have certain rights and choices that are taken into consideration within family law proceedings. This article explores the range of choices a child under 16 can have in family law cases and the circumstances in which their views may influence matters such as living arrangements, school choice, relocation, religion, medical treatment, and other key aspects.
Family law places a high priority on the welfare and best interests of children, and they have certain rights and choices that are taken into consideration within family law proceedings. This article explores the range of choices a child under 16 can have in family law cases and the circumstances in which their views may influence matters such as living arrangements, school choice, relocation, religion, medical treatment, and other key aspects.
If you have a family law issue and you require legal advice to understand your options, contact specialist family law solicitor Joanne Major. Joanne is the founder of her specialist family law firm and has spent her 25-year legal career specialising in family and matrimonial cases.
Living arrangements
One of the most common issues when family relationships break down is deciding on the living arrangements of a child. The Children Act 1989 governs this matters, and it prioritises the child’s welfare in any decisions made by the courts. Under this legislation, the court may issue a Child Arrangements Order (CAO), which sets out who the child should live with and when they should spend time with the other parent.
While children under 16 do not have the legal right to decide where they live, their preferences can still play a significant role, especially as they grow older. For instance, a child aged 12 or older may have their views given considerable weight, though it is ultimately up to the judge to decide based on what is in the child’s best interests. Even younger children’s wishes may be considered, typically with input from a CAFCASS (Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service) officer, who assesses the child’s views and wellbeing.
Contact with relatives
Children may also have a say in spending time with other relatives, such as grandparents or siblings. Family law recognises the importance of maintaining relationships with extended family, particularly where these relationships are significant for the child’s emotional and social welfare. However, if disputes arise, the court must put the child first. Grandparents, for example, must first apply for permission to apply for a CAO to maintain regular contact. If the child is old enough to express an informed opinion, their wishes will be considered and carry more weight than those of younger children. Here, CAFCASS will assess the connection between the child and their grandparents, amongst other things, and make a recommendation to the court.
School and education choices
Educational choices can have a profound impact on a child’s future, so disputes regarding schooling can sometimes emerge, especially when parents have different preferences for their child’s education. Children under 16 do not hold an autonomous right to decide their school, but in some cases, their preferences are taken into account.
If parents cannot agree, a court may intervene and issue a Specific Issue Order to resolve the dispute, examining the potential impact on the child’s wellbeing and educational outcomes. For example, if a 14-year-old has a clear preference for a school with a specific curriculum that aligns with their interests, the court might factor this in. However, this will always depend on the child’s maturity and the specific circumstances, including logistical and financial considerations.
Relocation decisions
When one parent wishes to relocate with a child—either within the UK or abroad—family law requires that the other parent’s consent is obtained. If the non-relocating parent does not consent, the moving parent must seek permission from the court. Here, the child’s views can be influential, particularly if they are in their teenage years.
The court is cautious about approving relocations that may disrupt the child’s relationship with the non-moving parent, unless there is a compelling reason that aligns with the child’s best interests. If a 15-year-old, for instance, expresses strong objections to relocating abroad because of academic, social, or familial ties, the court may consider this. However, for younger children, these views may hold less sway unless they are accompanied by evidence that relocation could be detrimental to their wellbeing.
Travel abroad
Travel outside of the UK, whether for holidays or family visits, also requires the consent of both parents if there is a shared living arrangement as part of a CAO or parental responsibility. For short-term trips, a child under 16 typically cannot choose independently where or when to travel. However, older children may express preferences that the court or parents might take into account, especially if they have strong connections to family members abroad or have compelling reasons for the travel.
Religious choices
Religion can be a sensitive area, especially when parents have different beliefs and wish to pass those on to their children. While younger children are usually guided by their parents religious practices, family law recognises that children, as they mature, may form their own views on religion.
The court tends to be cautious about imposing any specific religious practice on a child. When parents disagree, the court’s decision will aim to balance both parents rights to pass on their beliefs while giving weight to the child’s emerging autonomy, particularly for older children who may express their religious preferences. If, for example, a 15-year-old expresses a desire to practice a religion different from their parents, the court may take this into consideration in its rulings, provided it does not conflict with the child’s welfare.
Medical decisions
Medical treatment is another area where children’s autonomy is acknowledged, especially when they can understand the implications of their choices. Under UK law, children under 16 may consent to medical treatment if they are deemed “Gillick competent”. This is a term derived from the Gillick v West Norfolk and Wisbech Area Health Authority case, which established that children could make medical decisions if they demonstrate sufficient maturity and understanding.
Gillick competency allows children to consent to treatments such as vaccinations, mental health therapy, or contraceptive advice without parental consent. However, for more serious medical treatments or interventions, parental consent may still be required unless the child’s competency is clearly established, and the treatment is deemed necessary for their health and wellbeing.
Social media and internet use
While not traditionally within family law’s jurisdiction, parents sometimes disagree on a child’s use of social media and the internet, which can significantly impact a child’s mental health and social development. Although children under 16 generally need parental guidance in this area, the court might step in if a child’s exposure is deemed harmful or in cases of significant parental disagreement, particularly in high-conflict divorces.
Influence on court proceedings
Children under 16 cannot participate directly in court proceedings, but their views are often represented by a Guardian ad Litem or through reports by CAFCASS officers. In some cases, the court may allow older children to speak privately with the judge, though this is typically done informally. The court remains cautious to avoid placing children in stressful situations but seeks to understand their perspective, especially if they are mature enough to contribute meaningfully to the decision.
Find The Best Divorce & Family Lawyers Near You
We independently review and list the top divorce lawyers and family solicitors in the towns and cities near you. 100% free.
The information on this website is to be considered a guide and is therefore not legal advice. You use this information with the understanding that Wiselaw does not accept liability for any direct or indirect losses as a result of anyone relying on or acting upon the information on this website. Whilst we endeavour to provide accurate information, Wiselaw does not accept liability for any errors or omissions on this website.
