When parents separate or get divorced, the children will often live with one parent on a day-to-day basis – the so-called ‘resident parent’. But most separated couples recognise the importance of the children continuing to enjoy a relationship with the absent parent, via everything from overnight visits to holidays to weekend outings.

In between times, of course, they can also stay in touch via phone calls, email, or increasingly, video calls. Like emails or the phone, video calls might lend themselves to spontaneity, helping to maintain a sense of connection and communication even when the other parent is far away.

From a legal standpoint, video calls with your children are just another form of “contact” and spending time with your child following divorce or separation. However, while the concept of maintaining contact through digital means such as FaceTime or Zoom may appear straightforward, the reality can be more nuanced.

The courts and solicitors are increasingly recognising the importance of preserving the parent-child relationship post-separation, especially when physical contact is limited by geography, work commitments, or other logistical barriers.

Legal framework and principles

Family law operates under the guiding principle that the welfare of the child is paramount. Section 1 of the Children Act 1989 enshrines this, requiring courts to consider the child’s best interests above all. While there is no specific statute mandating video contact, it is often incorporated into broader arrangements concerning child contact or residence.

The court can make a Child Arrangements Order (CAO), which may include provisions for direct (in-person) and indirect (telephone, letters, video calls) contact. Even if not specified in a formal order, video contact may be considered as a reasonable form of indirect contact, particularly in situations where direct contact is temporarily suspended or the parents live a long way from one another.

What role do video calls play in parenting after divorce or separation?

FaceTime and Zoom have been a technological gift for many separated parents, enabling a sense of real time with their kids even when they cannot be there in person – perhaps because the next scheduled visit is still weeks or even months away. The extra visual dimension makes the experience a richer and more fulfilling one for both parent and child. Of course, the time of day that the video calls take place and their duration should be appropriate for the child’s age, especially for younger children who will have home routines to consider and shorter attention spans.

For separated parents who live nearby and see their children regularly, video calls might well be less important, but work and personal circumstances push many parents some distance away, drastically reducing the time they can spend with kids who were most likely a part of their daily lives before the divorce. For them, video calls can seem like the next best thing to being in the same room.

Like other aspects of contact, establishing a successful video call routine with your children is ultimately about keeping the lines of communication open. Talk to the resident parent, log on when you say you’re going to – and do your very best to make time together online a rewarding and fun experience.

When might a formal agreement be needed?

While many separated parents manage contact informally, there are circumstances where a formal agreement—or even a court order—is advisable or necessary:

  • High conflict cases: In acrimonious separations, video-calling can become a battleground. One parent might deny or delay video contact out of spite or control. In such cases, clarity in a formal agreement or court order can ensure consistency and accountability.
  • International or long-distance parenting: If one parent relocates to another city or country, virtual contact becomes a vital lifeline. Formalising this arrangement can help prevent disputes and interruptions.
  • Parental alienation concerns: Where one parent fears the other may alienate the child or limit their communication, formalising video contact can serve as a protective mechanism.
  • Enforcement: If a parent breaches an agreement, enforcement is only possible through the courts if the arrangement is part of a legally binding order. Informal arrangements, no matter how detailed, lack enforceability.

If you are on amicable terms with your ex, you could consider drawing up a parenting plan and setting out a schedule of contact with the non-resident parent covering things such as video-calling.

What is a parenting plan?

Creating a formal, written agreement or ‘parenting plan’ sets down exactly what each parent has agreed in relation to contact – including, of course, video calls. It clarifies expectations and – if drafted properly – removes any misunderstandings that may have arisen between the parents. Parenting plans can also help separated parents who may still be seething with resentment towards each other to focus on the best interests of the children.

And there is yet another reason to consider a formal parenting plan: if you run into problems with other parent in the future and have to resort to the family courts, they bring clarity to an emotional situation, show good faith and a sincere effort to make things work in the best interests of the children.

You can draw up your own parenting plan, but a family solicitor will be able to help you draft an optimal one – one that will cover all eventualities and that will carry the most weight with the family courts.

In terms of video-calling, a well-drafted parenting plan will outline specifics such as:

  • Frequency and timing of video calls
  • Length of each session
  • Platform(s) to be used (e.g., Zoom, FaceTime, WhatsApp)
  • Protocols for missed or disrupted calls
  • Responsibilities for setting up the technology
  • How to address changes during holidays or school breaks

Solicitors and mediators can help formalise such agreements, if necessary.

Could mediation help resolve disagreements surrounding video-calling?

Family mediation can be instrumental in resolving disputes about video contact. The government has supported increased use of mediation, and Legal Aid is available for those who qualify. Mediators help parents communicate constructively and arrive at practical solutions that are child-focused.

Mediation can result in a written agreement which, although not automatically legally binding, demonstrates mutual commitment.

Case law and judicial trends

Although individual cases are fact-specific, some judicial commentary has highlighted the importance of maintaining relationships through technology. In Re S (A Child) [2015] EWCA Civ 689, the Court of Appeal emphasised the value of indirect contact when direct contact is temporarily unfeasible. Although not limited to video calls, the logic applies: technology can be a meaningful form of engagement, especially with younger children accustomed to digital interaction.

Judges also expect parents to encourage, rather than hinder, such contact. The case of Re H-B (Contact) [2015] EWCA Civ 389 reinforced that a parent who fails to promote contact may find their own role diminished in the child’s life by court order.

Practical considerations

  • Child’s age and maturity: The appropriateness of video-calling varies with age. Toddlers may struggle to engage meaningfully on screen, while older children may value privacy and prefer to initiate calls themselves. It is essential that arrangements respect the child’s developmental needs.
  • Supervised calls: In some cases, video contact may need to be supervised—either due to safeguarding concerns or to help rebuild a strained relationship. This could be managed by a trusted third party or through supervised contact centres equipped for virtual monitoring.
  • Time zones and scheduling: If one parent lives abroad, time zones must be factored into call schedules. A rigid plan may not serve the child’s best interests if it interferes with school or sleep routines.
  • Technical challenges: A stable internet connection, age-appropriate devices, and digital literacy are prerequisites for effective virtual contact. The court may expect both parents to facilitate this unless there are genuine financial or technical limitations.

What if one parent refuses?

If one parent unreasonably blocks video contact, the other can apply to court for a variation or enforcement of a Child Arrangements Order. The court will examine the reasons for refusal and whether the arrangement serves the child’s welfare.

However, unilateral refusal to allow video contact—without valid justification—can be viewed unfavourably. Courts are increasingly aware of the risks of emotional harm caused by obstructing parental relationships.

Parental responsibility and communication

Both parents with Parental Responsibility (typically mothers and married fathers or those named on the birth certificate post-2003 in England and Wales) are expected to communicate and cooperate in matters affecting the child’s welfare. This includes facilitating contact.

Even if a parent lacks Parental Responsibility, they may still apply to the court for contact rights under Section 8 of the Children Act 1989. The absence of PR does not extinguish the child’s right to a relationship with both parents.

Changing needs over time

Video contact arrangements should be adaptable. As children grow, their preferences and schedules change. It is advisable for parents to periodically review arrangements—formally or informally—and make adjustments collaboratively, if possible.

If agreement cannot be reached, an application to vary the existing court order can be made. The court will again consider the best interests of the child at the time of the application.

While there is no legal requirement to have a formal agreement for video-calling your children post-divorce or separation, such arrangements can be vital in safeguarding consistent and meaningful contact—especially where informal cooperation is lacking. Whether through mediation, consent orders, or court-imposed Child Arrangements Orders, legal mechanisms exist to ensure that virtual parenting is supported and, when necessary, enforced.

Ultimately, video contact should not be treated as a secondary or inferior form of engagement. When used thoughtfully, it can play a critical role in sustaining the parent-child bond across distance, time zones, and emotional divides. Parents are encouraged to view such technology not as a substitute, but as a supplement to in-person contact—a bridge between households in service of their children’s emotional continuity.