The legal meaning of ‘father’, the acquisition of PR: an analysis and discussion of Re J, Re M, Re P

Shiva Ancliffe KC, Coram Chambers, William Horwood, Lauren Starmer and Daniel Taylor, St Philipps Chambers

This article examines the Court of Appeal’s decision in Re J, Re M, Re P (Loss of Parental Responsibility) [2026] EWCA Civ 344, a judgment central to current debates about the legal meaning of ‘father’ under the Children Act 1989 and the acquisition of parental responsibility (PR) by registration. 

The court clarified that ‘father’ refers solely to a biological or genetic father, excluding non-biological fathers from acquiring PR by being named on a birth certificate, regardless of longstanding beliefs or practices. 

While the authors endorse the legal clarity this brings, the judgment leaves several issues unresolved. These include the lack of a route to PR for unmarried social or psychological fathers of children in care, the inadequacy of s 3(5) CA 1989 as a substitute for full parental responsibility, and the ‘abduction gap’ in international cases involving non-biological fathers.