Purpose
This guidance is intended to support practitioners when a mother or resident parent requests that Children's Services do not contact a father because of previous or ongoing domestic abuse.
It recognises two equally important duties:
- The need to undertake robust, evidence-based assessments that consider the role, capacity, and risks associated with all parents and significant adults in a child's life
- The need to prioritise the safety and wellbeing of children and adult victims who may be at risk of further abuse, intimidation, coercion, harassment, or retaliation. Children are recognised in law as victims of domestic abuse in their own right where they see, hear, or experience its effects.
The question should not be:
"Do we contact the father or not?"
Instead, practitioners should ask:
"What is the safest and most proportionate way of assessing and involving the father while managing the risks created by the domestic abuse?"
Core Principles
1 Neither Parent Should Be Assessed in Isolation
Good assessments require consideration of all individuals holding parental responsibility or playing a significant role in the child's life. Excluding a father from assessment without analysis may result in incomplete decision-making.
However, involvement should never be automatic and should always be informed by a risk assessment.
2. Safety Must Take Priority
Where domestic abuse has occurred, practitioners should recognise that contact from Children's Services may inadvertently increase risks to the victim parent and children.
Perpetrators may:
- Use professional involvement to re-establish contact.
- Escalate coercive and controlling behaviour.
- Seek information about the victim's whereabouts.
- Attempt to manipulate assessments.
- Retaliate against the victim for disclosures made to professionals.
- Consequently, the potential benefits of contacting the father must be balanced against the potential for further harm.
3. The Child's Welfare Remains Paramount
The primary purpose of involving a father is not to satisfy procedural requirements but to understand:
- Risks posed to the child.
- Protective capacity.
- Parenting capability.
- The father's wishes and plans for the child.
- Potential support networks.
- Permanence options where appropriate.
- Recommended Practice Framework
Step 1: Explore the Mother's Concerns Fully
Where a mother requests that the father is not contacted, practitioners should avoid automatically agreeing or disagreeing. Instead, explore:
- Nature of the abuse.
- Recency of incidents.
- Any criminal history.
- Existing injunctions or protective orders.
- Stalking or harassment concerns.
- Risks of escalation.
- Previous breaches of orders.
- Child's experiences and views.
- Whether the father knows the family's location.
- Questions should focus on understanding risk rather than testing credibility.
Step 2: Complete a Specific Safety Assessment
Before making contact with the father, consider:
- High-Risk Indicators
- Coercive and controlling behaviour.
- Serious physical violence.
- Strangulation history.
- Stalking.
- Threats to kill.
- Honour-based abuse concerns.
- Recent separation.
- Ongoing criminal proceedings.
- MARAC involvement.
- Previous child protection concerns.
Where these indicators are present, consultation with domestic abuse specialists and managers should occur before any contact is attempted.
Step 3: Consider Alternative Sources of Information
A thorough assessment does not always require immediate direct contact with the father.
Information may be available from:
- Police records.
- Probation.
- Health records.
- Previous social care involvement.
- Family court proceedings.
- CAFCASS records.
- Domestic abuse services.
- Education information.
- Extended family members.
There may be occasions when sufficient information exists to make safeguarding decisions without immediate direct engagement.
Step 4: Managerial Oversight
Decisions not to contact a father should not ordinarily be made by a practitioner in isolation.
Management oversight should record:
- The reasons for the request.
- Risks identified.
- Protective factors.
- Alternative information sources considered.
- The rationale for either contacting or not contacting the father.
- Plans for future review.
This protects both families and practitioners and demonstrates defensible decision-making.
Step 5: If Contact Is Required, Plan It Carefully
Where contact is necessary, practitioners should consider:
- Information Sharing
- Only share information that is necessary and proportionate.
Avoid disclosing:
- Addresses.
- School locations where inappropriate.
- Victim contact details.
- Safe-house locations.
- Information that might identify the source of disclosures where this creates risk.
Timing - Consider whether immediate contact is required or whether it can safely be delayed.
Safety Planning
Inform the mother beforehand where safe to do so.
Consider:
- Whether additional support is required.
- Whether domestic abuse workers should be involved.
- Whether police intelligence suggests heightened risks.
- When Might It Be Appropriate Not to Contact the Father Immediately?
Examples may include:
- The family is residing in a refuge.
- There are active stalking concerns.
- There is evidence of severe coercive control.
- There are ongoing criminal investigations.
- The mother and children have recently fled abuse.
- Contact would likely reveal the family's location.
- There is a significant risk of immediate reprisals.
In such cases, the decision should be reviewed regularly rather than treated as permanent.
Signs of Good Practice
Practitioners should be able to evidence:
- Father's role has been considered.
- Risks arising from domestic abuse have been analysed.
- The mother's fears have been explored and taken seriously.
- Decisions are evidence-based rather than assumption-based.
- Management oversight has been obtained.
- The child's welfare remains central.
- Safety planning has informed all contact decisions.
- The rationale for decisions is clearly recorded.
Key Practice Message
A mother's request not to contact an abusive father should never be automatically accepted, but it should always be taken seriously. The safest and most defensible approach is neither blanket inclusion nor blanket exclusion. Rather, practitioners should undertake a clear risk assessment, seek management oversight, consider alternative sources of information, and ensure that any involvement of an abusive father is proportionate, purposeful, and does not place children or adult victims at further risk of harm.