The Scottish Government has confirmed that it will review the law relating to parental responsibilities and rights where a parent has been convicted of certain serious offences, including sexual offences. The announcement has attracted considerable attention, particularly from survivors and organisations supporting victims of domestic and sexual abuse. It also raises an important question about the way in which Scotland’s criminal and family justice systems interact when decisions require to be made about children.
At present, a criminal conviction does not, by itself, automatically remove a parent’s parental responsibilities and rights in Scotland. But what does that mean in practice and does having parental rights mean that a parent has an automatic right to see their child?
What are parental responsibilities and parental rights?
Parental responsibilities and rights, commonly referred to as PRRs, are principally governed by the Children (Scotland) Act 1995. They include responsibilities to safeguard and promote a child’s health, development and welfare; provide appropriate direction and guidance; maintain personal relations and direct contact with a child who does not live with the parent, where that is practicable and in the child’s interests; and act as the child’s legal representative. Corresponding parental rights exist to enable a parent to fulfil those responsibilities. These include rights relating to a child’s residence and upbringing, maintaining personal relations and direct contact, and acting as the child’s legal representative. Importantly, however, having PRRs is not the same thing as having an unrestricted or automatic entitlement to contact with a child.
What happens if a parent is convicted of a serious sexual offence?
Under the current law, conviction of a sexual offence does not automatically extinguish a parent’s PRRs. That reflects, in part, the fact that criminal proceedings and family proceedings perform different functions. The criminal court determines whether an offence has been committed and, following conviction, determines the appropriate sentence and any relevant protective measures. Questions about child contact and residence and the exercise or removal of PRRs are ordinarily dealt with through the civil courts. This can mean that, despite a serious criminal conviction, separate family proceedings may still be required to determine what should happen in relation to the child. The Scottish Government has now confirmed that it intends to examine whether that position should change.
What is the Scottish Government proposing to review?
In September 2026, Victims Minister Kirsten Oswald confirmed that the Scottish Government would review the current legal position and consider the options available. The review is expected to consider the possibility of automatically restricting or suspending PRRs where a parent has been convicted of certain serious offences. One of the issues identified by the Minister is the burden currently placed upon a victim or family member who may have to make an application to the civil court to obtain protection following a conviction.
The Government has not yet enacted such a change. Any reform would require legislation and would need to address significant questions about which convictions should trigger the provisions, whether restriction should be automatic or subject to judicial consideration, how long any suspension should last, and how longer-term decisions about an individual child’s welfare should subsequently be made.
Does a convicted parent currently have an automatic right to contact?
This is where terminology matters. It is sometimes said that a parent has a “right to contact”. In Scottish family law, however, the position is more nuanced. When a court is asked to make an order under section 11 of the Children (Scotland) Act 1995, the focus is not simply upon the rights claimed by either parent.
The child’s welfare is the court’s paramount consideration.
The court therefore requires to consider what arrangement is in the interests of the particular child. The existence of PRRs does not mean that contact must take place regardless of risk. Depending upon the circumstances, a court can regulate contact, impose conditions upon it, provide for supervised contact or determine that direct contact should not take place. The court also has power to make specific issue orders relating to the exercise and potentially the removal of parental responsibilities and parental rights.
Why might the proposed change be significant?
One of the most important issues raised by the proposed review is where the burden should lie after a serious criminal conviction. Under the present system, a protective parent may find themselves involved in separate civil proceedings concerning the child notwithstanding the existence of a criminal conviction. The Scottish Government’s review raises the possibility of reversing that position in defined circumstances. For example, legislation could potentially provide for an immediate restriction or suspension following specified convictions, leaving any longer-term question about PRRs or contact to be determined subsequently by the court. That would be materially different from requiring the child’s other parent or another family member to initiate proceedings to obtain protection.
However, the precise model has not yet been determined and will require careful consideration.
Would automatic removal of PRRs be straightforward?
Not necessarily. There are important distinctions between:
- automatically removing PRRs;
- automatically suspending them pending further consideration;
- restricting only particular parental rights;
- requiring a court to consider PRRs following conviction; and
- requiring the convicted parent to apply to the family court before exercising particular rights.
Any new system would also require to accommodate the individual circumstances of children and families and the overarching requirement to protect children’s welfare. The nature of the offence, the identity of the victim, the relationship between the offending behaviour and any risk to the child, and the child’s individual circumstances may all potentially be relevant to longer-term decision-making. There are also questions about how any new provisions would interact with children’s rights and Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. These are likely to be important issues as the Scottish Government develops its proposals and consults upon any legislation.
What does this mean for families now?
For the moment, the law has not changed. A parent does not presently lose PRRs automatically simply because they have been convicted of a sexual offence. Equally, retaining PRRs should not be confused with an automatic entitlement to unrestricted contact.
Where there are concerns about a child’s safety or welfare, the court has existing powers to regulate matters including residence, contact and parental responsibilities and rights. Every case will depend upon its particular facts, and allegations of abuse, criminal convictions, risk to the child and the child’s welfare require careful consideration. The Scottish Government’s review may ultimately change the point at which the family court becomes involved and, importantly, who bears the burden of bringing proceedings following a serious conviction. For Scottish family lawyers and families affected by these issues, this will therefore be an important area of reform to watch.
This article is for general information only and does not constitute legal advice. If you require advice about parental responsibilities and rights, child contact, domestic abuse or a section 11 application in Scotland, specialist advice should be taken about your individual circumstances.
