Under CA 1989 s. 2, married parents both have parental responsibility. Unmarried fathers must acquire it. Each person may act alone and cannot transfer it.
Official text
·
CA 1989 s. 2 — United Kingdom
Where a child’s father and mother were married to , or civil partners of, each other at the time of his birth, they shall each have parental responsibility for the child. Where a child— has a parent by virtue of section 42 of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008; or has a parent by virtue of section 43 of that Act and is a person to whom section 1(3) of the Family Law Reform Act 1987 applies, the child's mother and the other parent shall each have parental responsibility for the child. Where a child’s father and mother were not married to , or civil partners of, each other at the time of his birth— the mother shall have parental responsibility for the child; the father shall have parental responsibility for the child if he has acquired it (and has not ceased to have it) in accordance with the provisions of this Act. Where a child has a parent by virtue of section 43 of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008 and is not a person to whom section 1(3) of the Family Law Reform Act 1987 applies— the mother shall have parental responsibility for the child; the other parent shall have parental responsibility for the child if she has acquired it (and has not ceased to have it) in accordance with the provisions of this Act. References in this Act to a child whose father and mother were, or (as the case may be) were not, married to , or civil partners of, each other at the time of his birth must be read with section 1 of the Family Law Reform Act 1987 (which extends their meaning). The rule of law that a father is the natural guardian of his legitimate child is abolished. More than one person may have parental responsibility for the same child at the same time. A person who has parental responsibility for a child at any time shall not cease to have that responsibility solely because some other person subsequently acquires parental responsibility for the child. Where more than one person has parental responsibility for a child, each of them may act alone and without the other (or others) in meeting that responsibility; but nothing in this Part shall be taken to affect the operation of any enactment which requires the consent of more than one person in a matter affecting the child. The fact that a person has parental responsibility for a child shall not entitle him to act in any way which would be incompatible with any order made with respect to the child under this Act. A person who has parental responsibility for a child may not surrender or transfer any part of that responsibility to another but may arrange for some or all of it to be met by one or more persons acting on his behalf. The person with whom any such arrangement is made may himself be a person who already has parental responsibility for the child concerned. The making of any such arrangement shall not affect any liability of the person making it which may arise from any failure to meet any part of his parental responsibility for the child concerned.
Section 2 allocates parental responsibility. Where the child's father and mother were married to, or civil partners of, each other at the time of the birth, they each have it. Where they were not, the mother has it and the father has it only if he has acquired it under the Act and has not lost it - in practice by being registered on the birth certificate for a birth registered after 1 December 2003, by a parental responsibility agreement, or by court order. Parallel provisions in subsections (1A) and (2A) deal with parents by virtue of sections 42 and 43 of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008.
Subsection (5) says more than one person may have parental responsibility for the same child at the same time, and subsection (6) that a person does not lose it merely because someone else acquires it. Subsection (7) is the practical rule that surprises separated parents: where more than one person has parental responsibility, "each of them may act alone and without the other" in meeting it, except where an enactment requires the consent of more than one person. There is no general duty to consult, though certain steps - changing a child's surname, taking them out of the jurisdiction, where a child arrangements order is in force - are controlled by section 13, and a disputed decision can be brought to court as a specific issue or prohibited steps application under section 8.
Subsection (9) prevents parental responsibility being surrendered or transferred, while allowing arrangements for some or all of it to be met by others acting on the holder's behalf - which is what happens when a child stays with grandparents. Subsection (11) makes clear that such an arrangement does not shift the responsibility itself.
When it applies
An unmarried father who is not on the birth certificate and wants parental responsibility.
One parent making a decision about medical treatment or schooling without telling the other.
A step-parent asking what standing they have in decisions about the child.
Grandparents caring for a child day to day and being asked to consent to something.
A parent who wants to know whether a new partner acquiring parental responsibility removes theirs.
What this section does not say
×It does not require parents to consult each other. Subsection (7) allows each holder to act alone, subject to any enactment requiring more than one consent.
×It does not give an unmarried father parental responsibility automatically. He must acquire it in one of the ways the Act provides.
×It does not decide where a child lives or who they see. That is a section 8 question.
×It cannot be given away. Parental responsibility may be delegated in its exercise but not surrendered or transferred.
×It is not lost when someone else gains it. Subsection (6) says so expressly.
×It is not defined here. What parental responsibility consists of is in section 3.
Worked examples
Invented situations, written to show how the wording bites. They are not real cases, not judgments and not precedent, and nothing here predicts what would happen in yours.
Illustrative example
A child's father was never named on the birth certificate and the parents never married. He has now enrolled the child at a different school without telling the mother, who says he had no right to.
How the wording applies
Two separate questions sit inside this. First, whether he has parental responsibility at all: where the parents were not married, the mother has it and the father only if he acquired it - by registration on the birth certificate for a birth registered after 1 December 2003, by agreement, or by court order. The fact that decides the school point is that first question, because if he does not hold it he could not act; and if he does, subsection (7) lets each holder act alone, which is the rule separated parents find hardest.
How the parties settled it
They agree the child stays at the current school for the rest of the year, and that either parent will give the other fourteen days' notice and a chance to discuss before any decision about schooling, medical treatment or travel.
Illustrative example
A step-parent has helped raise a child for six years and is regularly asked by the school and the GP to consent to things. Nobody is sure whether they can.
How the wording applies
Subsection (5) allows more than one person to have parental responsibility for the same child at once, and subsection (6) confirms that nobody loses it because someone else acquires it - so granting it to a step-parent takes nothing away from either parent. The fact that decides whether the step-parent can consent is whether they have actually acquired parental responsibility under section 4A, by agreement with those who hold it or by court order; long involvement on its own does not confer it.
How the parties settled it
The parents and the step-parent sign a parental responsibility agreement covering day-to-day medical and school consent, with the two parents retaining joint decision-making on schooling and any move.
Say what is happening. A neutral mediator hears your side and the other party's, and walks you both to a written agreement. In the advanced settings you can ask for the decision to be reasoned on the Acts of Parliament that apply in England and Wales.
We copy this text from the official publisher and re-check it against that source on every page load, but we cannot guarantee it is complete, current or free of error, and we accept no liability for any reliance on it. An amendment can take effect before a consolidation catches up. The publisher's own copy is linked below; where the two differ, it is the official one that counts.
This page reproduces the text of CA 1989 s. 2 in force at the date shown and explains it in general terms. It is not legal advice and takes no account of the circumstances of your case, which can change the answer completely. For a live dispute, for limitation periods, and before taking any step in court, consult a qualified lawyer in England and Wales.