Chamber
commons
Stage
2nd Reading
Introduced
Sep 18, 2025
Progress
This bill amends the Divorce Act to better protect children and domestic violence survivors during divorce and custody proceedings.
Key Changes
- Lawyers must assess the risk of family violence for their client and help create a safety plan if a risk exists
- Courts cannot assume family violence has stopped just because spouses have separated or divorce proceedings have started
- Courts generally cannot consider allegations that a parent deliberately turned a child against the other parent (parental alienation claims), with limited exceptions
- Courts cannot order children to attend reunification therapy, and cannot allow one parent to consent to it without the other parent's agreement
- Courts may hear directly from children in writing or through a private interview to understand their views and preferences
- When a parent who has primary care of a child wants to relocate, the court must approve the move unless the opposing parent proves it is not in the child's best interests
Gotchas
- The bill removes the existing presumption that equal shared parenting is in the best interests of the child, which is a significant shift from the current approach in the Divorce Act
- The ban on reunification therapy applies broadly to any program aimed at repairing a child-parent relationship, which could affect a wide range of therapeutic services beyond programs specifically labelled as reunification therapy
- The transitional provision means that if a past court decision relied on a parental alienation finding, that prior decision can be treated as a 'change in circumstances' to reopen the case under the new rules
- The bill allows courts to hear from children directly, but only if both spouses agree and the court determines it is safe — meaning this option may not be available in high-conflict cases where one parent objects
- The relocation provisions shift the burden of proof so that the parent opposing a move must prove it is not in the child's best interests, rather than the relocating parent having to justify the move, when the child primarily lives with the relocating parent
Who's Affected
- Children involved in divorce or custody proceedings
- Survivors of domestic or family violence going through divorce
- Family lawyers and legal advisers
- Family court judges
- Parents seeking or opposing relocation with their children
- Parents accused of parental alienation
Vibes
0 responses
Gotchas
- The bill removes the existing presumption that equal shared parenting is in the best interests of the child, which is a significant shift from the current approach in the Divorce Act
- The ban on reunification therapy applies broadly to any program aimed at repairing a child-parent relationship, which could affect a wide range of therapeutic services beyond programs specifically labelled as reunification therapy
- The transitional provision means that if a past court decision relied on a parental alienation finding, that prior decision can be treated as a 'change in circumstances' to reopen the case under the new rules
- The bill allows courts to hear from children directly, but only if both spouses agree and the court determines it is safe — meaning this option may not be available in high-conflict cases where one parent objects
- The relocation provisions shift the burden of proof so that the parent opposing a move must prove it is not in the child's best interests, rather than the relocating parent having to justify the move, when the child primarily lives with the relocating parent
Summary
Bill C-223, called the Keeping Children Safe Act, changes Canada's Divorce Act to make family courts and lawyers more aware of domestic violence when making decisions about children after a separation or divorce. It requires lawyers to assess whether family violence is a risk for their client and to help create a safety plan if it is. It also addresses common myths about abuse — for example, courts can no longer assume that violence stops just because a couple has separated. The bill also limits the use of 'parental alienation' claims in court. These are allegations that one parent is deliberately turning a child against the other parent. The bill says courts generally cannot use such claims to reduce a parent's time with their child, especially when the parent making the claim has a history of family violence. Courts also cannot order children to attend 'reunification therapy' — programs designed to repair a child's relationship with a parent the child has rejected. The bill was introduced to address concerns that family courts sometimes make decisions that put children at greater risk by ignoring the realities of domestic abuse. It also gives courts a new way to hear directly from children about their wishes, in a safe and private setting.
Automatically generated from bill text using Claude
Vibes
0 responses