Parent of a Child Visa (10-Year Route): Proving a Genuine and Subsisting Parental Relationship

The UK immigration rules allow a parent to be granted leave to remain on the basis of their relationship with a child in the UK. In practice, many applications stand or fall on evidence. The Home Office will usually accept that a person is a child’s parent in a biological or legal sense if documents are in order. The more difficult question is often whether the applicant can show a genuine and subsisting parental relationship and, where relevant, that they take an active role in the child’s upbringing.

This issue arises most acutely where parents live apart, where contact is structured or limited, or where there is a history of family proceedings. The Home Office decision-maker will look for a coherent account, supported by objective records, that demonstrates real parenting over time rather than occasional contact or a relationship that exists mainly on paper. This article explains how the “genuine and subsisting parental relationship” requirement is approached in Parent of a Child Visa applications on the 10-year route, and how to present evidence of child contact and parental responsibility clearly and persuasively.

Understanding the Parent of a Child (10-Year Route) and the “Genuine and Subsisting” Test

Applications as a parent are usually made under Appendix FM to the Immigration Rules. Where an applicant cannot meet all requirements of the standard 5-year route, they may still be granted leave on the 10-year route where the relevant relationship requirements are met and refusal would breach Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (the right to respect for private and family life). In parent cases, the focus remains on whether the applicant has a genuine and subsisting parental relationship with a “qualifying child”, and whether the applicant is taking, and intends to continue to take, an active role in the child’s upbringing.

A “qualifying child” in this context is typically a child who is under 18 and is a British citizen, or has lived in the UK continuously for at least seven years, or holds settled status/ILR (the precise definition depends on the route and the provision being applied). It is crucial to identify which definition you rely on and evidence it. However, even with a qualifying child, the Home Office will not grant leave simply because the child exists: you must show that your relationship is real, ongoing, and involves parenting in a meaningful sense.

In practice, the Home Office assesses this by looking at the pattern and quality of contact, the applicant’s involvement in decisions and day-to-day welfare, financial and practical support, and the extent to which the child depends on the applicant emotionally and practically. Decision-makers tend to be sceptical of evidence that is self-generated, undated, or only covers a short period immediately before application. A good application therefore reads as a chronological narrative backed by independent records.

What “Active Role in Upbringing” Looks Like in Home Office Decision-Making

“Active role” does not require cohabitation with the child. Many genuine parent-child relationships involve separate households due to relationship breakdown, work, or safeguarding arrangements. The key is whether the applicant’s role goes beyond sporadic visits. The Home Office will typically look for evidence in three broad areas: regularity of contact, substance of involvement, and continuity over time.

Regular contact might be alternate weekends, midweek evenings, school holiday time, or daily involvement where the child lives primarily with the applicant. Where contact is supervised or limited, this does not automatically undermine the application; the application must instead explain why the arrangements exist and show the applicant’s commitment within those arrangements.

Substance of involvement is about parenting content. For example, attending parents’ evenings, communicating with teachers, taking the child to medical appointments, helping with homework, participating in extracurricular activities, and making or contributing to decisions about schooling, health, religion, or special educational needs. Financial support can matter, but it is not a substitute for caregiving. Conversely, a parent with limited income may still demonstrate an active role through consistent practical care and involvement.

Continuity over time is often decisive. A pattern of evidence spanning a year or more is usually more persuasive than a bundle that begins a few weeks before the application date. Where there has been a disruption (for example, contact stopped due to litigation, relocation, or safeguarding concerns), the application should address this directly and provide documents showing the steps taken to resume appropriate contact.

Child Contact Arrangements: How to Evidence the Reality of Your Parenting

Where parents live apart, a Parent of a Child application frequently turns on the credibility of child contact. The strongest applications treat contact as something that can be independently verified. If you rely heavily on screenshots of messages, the Home Office may view them as easy to curate. They are not useless, but they should not be the backbone of the case.

A well-presented application usually explains the contact routine in plain terms: where handovers occur, who transports the child, whether overnights happen, how school holidays are divided, and what happens when arrangements change (for example, due to illness, exams, or travel). The application should then exhibit evidence that maps onto that routine. For instance, if you say you collect the child from school every Wednesday, you would ideally show school records demonstrating authorised collection, communications with the school, and contemporaneous evidence of your presence and activities with the child.

Where contact is indirect (video calls, telephone contact), the application should explain why. This may occur where the child lives far away, where contact is being reintroduced gradually, or where safeguarding measures are in place. Evidence might include call logs, records from a contact centre, and correspondence with the other parent or a social worker. Again, what matters is a coherent account with independent corroboration.

It is also important to avoid overstating your role. If the reality is that contact is fortnightly and daytime only, say so, and demonstrate how you make that time meaningful and consistent. Exaggeration can damage credibility and make even good evidence look contrived.

Family Court Documents: When They Help, and How the Home Office Reads Them

Family court documents can be highly persuasive because they are independent and usually detailed. However, they must be handled carefully. The Home Office will be alert to orders that suggest a parent poses a risk to the child, has breached orders, or has limited contact due to safeguarding concerns. An application should not simply attach an order and hope for the best; it should explain what the order means in practice and how the applicant complies with it.

If there is a Child Arrangements Order setting out who the child lives with and how they spend time with each parent, it can provide a clear framework. If there are prohibited steps orders, specific issue orders, or non-molestation orders, these may be relevant to contact and to the overall credibility of the parental relationship. Where contact is supervised or restricted, the application should acknowledge this and demonstrate that the applicant is engaging appropriately, such as attending a contact centre, completing recommended programmes, or following professional guidance.

In some cases, the most relevant documents are not the final order but supporting materials such as Cafcass letters, position statements, or contact centre reports. These can show the parent’s attendance, punctuality, child-focused behaviour, and the child’s responses. However, applicants should be mindful of privacy and the scope of disclosure. It is sensible to disclose what is necessary to evidence the parental relationship while taking legal advice where proceedings are ongoing or where documents contain sensitive third-party information.

Where proceedings are ongoing, it may help to provide a procedural chronology and the most recent directions order to explain the current arrangements. The Home Office is not a family court and will not re-litigate findings, but it will take the existence and content of orders seriously. Presenting family court evidence transparently can help prevent refusal on the basis that the Home Office is not satisfied that contact is genuine or continuing.

School, Nursery and Educational Evidence: Often the Best Independent Proof

Schools and nurseries can provide some of the most compelling evidence of an active parental role because they generate routine, date-stamped records. Examples include letters confirming that the applicant is a parent or emergency contact, copies of emails between the applicant and teachers, records showing attendance at parents’ evenings, and documents showing the applicant is authorised to collect the child.

If the child has special educational needs, evidence of the applicant’s involvement in meetings, EHCP processes, or communications with the SENCO can be particularly strong. It demonstrates not just presence but responsibility and decision-making. If the applicant contributes to school-related costs (uniform, trips, clubs), receipts can support the narrative, but they are usually more persuasive when linked to broader involvement.

A common weakness is providing only a single letter from the school that simply states the child is enrolled. A targeted letter is more useful: it should confirm the applicant’s relationship to the child, the applicant’s involvement (for example, attending meetings, contacting staff, collecting the child), and the timeframe. Schools vary in what they will provide, but many can confirm factual matters without expressing opinions.

GP, NHS and Other Health Evidence: Demonstrating Welfare and Responsibility

Health-related evidence can show that the applicant is involved in the child’s welfare, particularly where the applicant attends appointments, is named on records, or is responsible for registration and routine care. Useful documents can include appointment letters showing the applicant’s details, vaccination or immunisation correspondence, or GP registration records that list parents or guardians.

As with school evidence, a single generic letter is less valuable than records that demonstrate involvement over time. If the applicant is involved in managing a health condition, evidence showing communication with clinicians, collection of prescriptions (where appropriate), or attendance at hospital clinics can be relevant. Care is needed with medical confidentiality. The focus should remain on the fact of involvement and responsibility rather than disclosing detailed medical information unnecessarily.

If social services have been involved, documents confirming the applicant’s engagement, attendance at meetings, or compliance with plans can also be relevant, though these situations require careful presentation where there are safeguarding concerns.

Presenting Your Evidence as a Coherent Parenting Narrative

The Home Office does not simply count documents; it assesses whether the overall picture makes sense. The most effective applications therefore organise evidence around the reality of the parenting arrangement and explain what each piece of evidence shows.

A persuasive statement will usually cover how the parental relationship developed, the circumstances of separation if relevant, the current arrangements for the child, and how the applicant contributes to the child’s daily life and longer-term welfare. It should deal candidly with difficult facts, such as periods without contact, conflict with the other parent, or restrictions. Where the other parent supports the application, a letter from them can assist, but it should not be treated as determinative. The Home Office may still require objective evidence.

Only two practical points merit emphasis because they frequently cause refusals. First, consistency matters: the contact pattern described in the applicant’s statement should align with any family court order and with the timeline in the documentary evidence. Secondly, show duration: aim to evidence parenting over a sustained period, not just immediately before applying, unless there is a clear reason why contact restarted recently and you can evidence the steps taken to re-establish it.

Common Pitfalls That Undermine Parent of a Child Applications

Refusals often follow from credibility concerns rather than a strict legal misunderstanding. Common problems include presenting extensive screenshots with little independent corroboration, failing to explain why the applicant does not live with the child, or ignoring family court orders that limit contact. Another recurring issue is confusing financial support with parental involvement. While maintenance can be relevant, the parent route is primarily about the relationship and the child’s best interests, not income.

There is also a practical drafting risk where applicants submit large bundles without structure. An overloaded bundle can make it harder for a decision-maker to see the key evidence. Quality and relevance are generally more persuasive than volume.

Finally, applicants should consider the wider suitability and compliance context. Even a strong parental relationship may not lead to a grant of leave if there are serious suitability issues, such as deception or significant criminality. Where such issues exist, specialist advice is essential because the legal analysis becomes more complex and fact-sensitive.

Conclusion: Make the Home Office’s Job Easy by Proving Parenting in the Real World

A Parent of a Child visa (10-year route) application succeeds most reliably when it demonstrates parenting as lived reality: regular contact, meaningful involvement, and a sustained commitment to the child’s welfare. The strongest evidence is usually generated by institutions that interact with the child and parent routinely, such as schools and the NHS, and by formal documentation where contact is governed by court orders or professional oversight.

A carefully prepared application should explain the family situation with clarity, address any restrictions or gaps honestly, and exhibit independent documents that corroborate the narrative. For separated parents, the key is to show that you are not merely a parent in name, but a parent in practice.

Contact Our Immigration Lawyers in Switzerland

If you are preparing an application as a Parent of a child under the UK Immigration Rules and are concerned about how to evidence child contact or parental responsibility, our immigration barristers can advise on the legal requirements, the presentation of family court material, and the most persuasive forms of supporting evidence for your circumstances. To arrange an initial consultation, please contact Richmond Chambers Switzerland on +41 21 588 07 70 or complete our enquiry form to arrange an initial consultation meeting.