Skip to content
  • print page
  • email us
  • rss feed

Coalition government looks to increase rights for grandparents

17th June 2010 by: David Lillywhite
The Deputy Prime Minister, Nick Clegg today outlined plans to increase the legal rights of grandparents as part of a series of reforms aimed at “taking back” childhood and reducing the burden on parents up and down the country.

As part of these reforms, the Government intends to set up a Childhood & Families Task Force staffed by senior ministers and chiefed with reviewing the law on a variety of issues including flexible parental leave, advertising aimed at children, rights to respite care for parents with disabled children and an overhaul of the current system for child tax credit in favour of income tax breaks.

Mr Clegg went on to acknowledge the role that grandparents can often play following the breakdown of a marriage or cohabitation, saying; “We all know the role grandparents can play in helping children through these difficult times. But often grandparents don’t feel empowered to step in. That’s crazy, and it needs to change”.

Grandparents are often relied upon by separating couples to provide a bedrock of emotional stability for their children while they adjust to the effect the end of a relationship can have on their home life. Parents will often look to grandparents to assist with child care or for financial support but following a separation, those grandparents do not have any automatic rights to contact.

At present, the Children Act 1989 gives step-parents the right to apply for contact or residence if a child has lived with that step-parent for three years as part of a family. The same right does not extend to grandparents who must apply for leave of the court before they can make a formal application for contact.

While it is only sensible that the increasing role grandparents play in the lives of their grandchildren is formally recognised, these reforms should nonetheless be approached with a degree of caution. There is the very real possibility that allowing grandparents to apply for contact or in some cases, residence, will open the floodgates to a raft of applications which will only mire the effectiveness of the court further. There is also the real possibility that contact and residence agreements will become altogether more complicated documents out of necessity, as they will need to take account not only of both parents of the child but potentially two sets of grandparents as well.

Regardless, this is still a step in the right direction that will be welcomed by campaigners for grandparents’ rights. It will certainly stimulate debate on an area long overdue for closer inspection and review.