Modern technology has made it remarkably easy for parents to know where their children are at almost any moment in time. A quick glance at a mobile phone app, GPS-enabled smartwatch or Bluetooth tracking device can reveal a child’s location within seconds. For many families, these features provide reassurance and an additional layer of safety; however, following separation or divorce, location tracking can become a source of disagreement between parents, particularly when one parent wishes to monitor a child while they are spending time with the other.

Although many parents assume they have an automatic legal right to know where their child is at all times, the legal position is considerably more complicated. Understanding where the legal boundaries lie can help separated parents avoid unnecessary conflict while ensuring that decisions remain focused on the child’s welfare.

There is no automatic right to track a child

There is no legislation that expressly gives either parent the right to install tracking software or devices on their children. But on the other hand, there is no law which outright prohibits it either. The law instead asks whether a parent’s actions are reasonable and whether they promote or undermine the child’s welfare.

Parents who share parental responsibility are expected to make important decisions together wherever possible. Introducing a system that allows one parent to monitor the child’s movements throughout contact with the other parent may therefore become a significant issue, particularly if it affects trust between the parents or interferes with the child’s relationship with either parent.

Does it matter which tracking device is used?

Many teenagers now carry smartphones that have built-in location sharing through services such as Apple’s Find My or Google’s Family Link. Some younger children wear GPS-enabled watches so parents know they have arrived safely at school or after-school activities. Other parents use Bluetooth tracking devices, such as AirTags or similar products, by placing them inside a child’s school bag or coat.

Although the legal principles remain broadly the same regardless of the technology used, the degree of intrusion may differ considerably. For example, a GPS smartwatch worn openly by a young child for safety purposes may appear far less controversial than secretly placing a tracking device inside the child’s belongings with no one else’s knowledge. Equally, temporary location sharing during a school trip may be viewed differently from permanent 24-hour monitoring that continues throughout time spent with the other parent.

The court is likely to consider not only the existence of tracking but also how intrusive it is, why it has been introduced, and whether it serves a genuine protective purpose.

The child’s age and maturity can make a significant difference

Age is often one of the most important considerations. A five-year-old who cannot safely travel independently presents very different considerations from a mature and largely independent sixteen-year-old. The older and more autonomous a child becomes, the greater weight is likely to be given to their own views regarding privacy and self-government.

Family courts increasingly recognise that older children should gradually assume greater control over decisions affecting their everyday lives. Constant electronic monitoring of an older teenager may therefore become increasingly difficult to justify unless there are genuine safeguarding concerns. For younger children, however, parents generally have greater scope to make decisions intended to protect their safety.

The child’s level of maturity can also become relevant. Some children may fully understand how location sharing works and willingly agree to it, while others may feel uncomfortable or pressured into accepting monitoring without fully appreciating the consequences.

How does parental responsibility affect the position?

Where both parents have parental responsibility, neither parent has unrestricted authority to make every decision without consulting the other. However, the law distinguishes between routine day-to-day decisions and major decisions affecting the child’s upbringing.

Whether introducing electronic tracking falls into one category or the other will depend upon the facts of the case. A parent may argue that enabling location sharing on a child’s phone is simply an everyday safety measure, but the other may consider it an intrusive step affecting the child’s privacy and their own parenting time.

If a disagreement arises, the court will examine whether the decision should have been discussed jointly and whether one parent’s unilateral actions were reasonable. It is important to remember that parental responsibility exists to benefit the child rather than to give either parent greater control over the other.

When might tracking be considered reasonable?

There are many situations where electronic tracking may be entirely appropriate. For example, parents may both agree that a younger child should wear a GPS watch while travelling independently to school.

Location sharing may also be sensible where a child has additional needs, medical vulnerabilities or a history of becoming lost. Likewise, if a teenager frequently walks home alone late in the evening, both parents may welcome temporary location sharing as an additional safety measure.

Essentially, tracking introduced primarily for safeguarding reasons, agreed by both parents and understood by the child, is far less likely to become problematic than tracking motivated by suspicion, mistrust, or attempts to supervise the other parent’s lifestyle.

Could court proceedings become necessary?

A parent who believes tracking is placing the child at risk, damaging the parent-child relationship, or amounting to inappropriate surveillance may ask the family court to rule on the dispute.

The court will not decide the case by asking whether technology is inherently good or bad; instead, the judge will consider the child’s welfare as the paramount consideration.

Evidence may include:

  • Why the tracking was introduced
  • Whether both parents were consulted
  • The child’s age and wishes
  • The level of intrusion involved
  • Any safeguarding concerns
  • The impact upon the child’s relationship with both parents

Outcomes will vary considerably because every family and their circumstances are different. Some outcomes include the court permitting continued tracking, requiring changes to how it operates, or ordering it to stop altogether.

If you are unsure whether tracking your child’s location is legally appropriate, or if you are involved in a dispute about electronic monitoring following separation or divorce, obtaining specialist family law advice can help you understand your rights, your responsibilities and the options available to protect both your child’s welfare and your ongoing parenting relationship.