A family who went to court to protect a young girl from her paedophile father have criticised government legislation intended to help others in a similar position.

The Victims and Courts Bill includes an amendment which would remove parental responsibility from convicted paedophiles – but only if they have abused their own children.

In 2023 the BBC reported on a mother who had to spend more than £30,000 to protect her small daughter. Her ex-husband had been convicted of the most serious child sex offences, but kept parental responsibility over his own child.

Her parents said they were “very disappointed”. The government said it was “the beginning of legal change in this area and not the end”.

Over many months in Cardiff Family Court I watched as a young woman, who we called “Bethan”, brought a case to protect her young daughter.

Although her ex-husband had been convicted of the most serious child sex offences, and was banned from contact with other children, he retained parental responsibility over his own child.

That meant that he could have a say over her education, decisions about her health, and where she would live.

He could also in future have contact with his daughter. In fact, he told the court from prison via a videolink, he was already writing letters every week to the little girl. He wasn’t allowed to send them.

At the end of the hearings, the judge granted the mother’s application, removing the father’s parental rights and barring him from all contact, including on social media, until the child turns 18.

The family were pleased – but it had cost them over £30,000 in legal fees.

Harriet Harman, who is now in the Lords but was then an MP, heard my report, and decided to try to change the law, to remove what she called this “glaring anomaly”.

Her amendment meant that after a criminal conviction for serious child sex offences, a parent would automatically lose their parental responsibility.

Families like Bethan’s would no longer need to go to the Family Court.

In April 2024 the Conservative Lord Chancellor Alex Chalk supported this change for the most serious cases, where children had been raped.

“This new law will ensure they are automatically safeguarded against those whose despicable actions have shown them to utterly lack any nurturing and caring instincts,” he said at the time.

Bethan and her parents were delighted.

But the government called the July election – and the law didn’t change.

In the most recent King’s Speech, in 2024, the Labour government promised to enact the change, saying it would restrict parental responsibility for child sex offenders.

However, when the wording of the new law was published on 7 May it said that removing parental responsibility would only apply “for a serious sexual offence committed against a child for whom the offender has parental responsibility”.

In other words, where someone had abused their own child or stepchild.

This would not cover Bethan’s family.

Bethan’s parents said the government should go back to the bill that Harriet Harman had proposed, where the emphasis was on “protecting innocent children” rather than “thinking about the rights of the paedophile”.

The draft legislation – which had its second reading in Parliament today – also says the restriction of parental responsibility should apply only where someone has been sentenced to at least four years in prison.

The grandparents of Bethan’s child believe it should apply more widely.

“Really what we’re talking about here is where the line is drawn. And we obviously think that line should be drawn much lower down,” the child’s grandfather said.

The grandmother said the court case had been a “terrible stress” for her daughter.

“What people don’t realise is when you take on a family court case, it’s like taking on a full time job because it takes hundreds of hours to get the information together,” she told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme.

Bethan had to take her child out of childcare, give up her flat, and “use every bit of savings” she had to pay for the family court, the child’s grandmother added.

Victims minister Alex Davies-Jones said in response: “We are protecting children and ensuring victims are properly supported.

“These changes will, for the first time, introduce an automatic suspension of parental responsibility for offenders who sexually abuse their own child and receive a prison sentence of four years or more – removing the need for victims to go through court to secure this.

“I do recognise the concerns raised by victims and campaigners and will continue working closely with them to ensure the law is as strong and protective as it needs to be.”

Shadow Justice Secretary Robert Jenrick said in the House of Commons that the bill did not go far enough.

“If a man rapes a neighbour’s child he keeps full rights over his own infant daughter,” he said.

“Additionally, offenders jailed for three years and 11 months – still a grave sentence – retain their rights. Where is the logic behind four years? This thus far is unexplained. Where is the child’s best interest?”

Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood said: “I understand the calls on us to be as ambitious as possible, and to expand this to a wider cohort of offenders, but we believe our measure is stronger than what came before and it is the right starting point for change.

“We will work collaboratively and constructively with members across this House and with those within the sector, and I do say to them all this is the beginning of legal change in this area and not the end.”