The Keeping Children Safe Act: What Bill C-223 Would Do

Author: SiLaw Group Family Lawyers
Published: Aug 10, 2026

---

A bill now before Parliament proposes major changes to Canada's Divorce Act. Bill C-223, called the Keeping Children Safe Act, would change how courts deal with family violence, parenting time, children's evidence and relocation after separation. To be clear up front: this is proposed law, not current law, and it does not apply to any case today.

Where the Bill Stands

Bill C-223 is a private member's bill sponsored by Lisa Hepfner, Member of Parliament for Hamilton Mountain. It received first reading in the House of Commons on September 18, 2025, and passed second reading on February 4, 2026. Its status as of August 10, 2026, as shown on Parliament's LEGISinfo site, is "at consideration in committee in the House of Commons," where the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights is studying it. You can read the full text of the bill and follow its progress on LEGISinfo.

Private members' bills face a hard road. Most never become law, and a bill's text can change in committee. Even so, this one has moved further than many.

New Duties for Lawyers Around Family Violence

The bill would require every lawyer acting for a spouse in a divorce to consider whether there are reasonable grounds to believe there is a risk of family violence that could affect the client's safety, a family member's safety, or the client's ability to negotiate a fair agreement. Where such a risk exists, the lawyer would have to take steps to put an appropriate plan in place, make sure the family has a safety plan, and tell the client about support services the lawyer knows of.

The bill would also ease duties around reconciliation. Lawyers would not need to raise reconciliation, or encourage out-of-court dispute resolution, where there is evidence of a risk of family violence. The court's current duty to satisfy itself that there is no possibility of reconciliation before hearing the evidence would be repealed.

Inferences Courts Could Not Draw About Family Violence

C-223 lists "myths and stereotypes" courts could not rely on. When weighing family violence, a court could not conclude that the violence has stopped, or that reports of it were unreliable or exaggerated, solely because, for example:

• the spouses separated or the divorce started;
• no one reported the violence to police or a child welfare agency;
• no criminal charges were laid, or a trial ended in a not-guilty finding;
• the allegations came late in the proceedings;
• statements about the violence were inconsistent;
• the spouse stayed in the relationship, or left and returned; or
• there were no visible injuries or outward signs of fear.

The bill also says that leaving a violent household for a shelter, or leaving the province with the children, is not, on its own, contrary to the children's interests.

Parenting Time and "Alienation" Claims

Today, the Divorce Act tells courts to give effect to the principle that a child should have as much time with each spouse as fits with the child's interests. C-223 would replace that with an express rule that there is no presumption that equal time, shared decision-making, or ongoing contact with each spouse serves the child.

The bill would also repeal the factor that asks about each spouse's willingness to support the child's relationship with the other spouse. And it takes direct aim at parental alienation claims: courts could not consider allegations that one spouse deliberately manipulated a child into resisting contact with the other spouse. A narrow exception would apply where the spouse said to have interfered has engaged in family violence. Courts could not cut back a child's time with a parent the child is close to in order to improve the child's relationship with the other parent, and could not order "reunification therapy" without both spouses' consent. Past orders that relied on alienation findings would be treated as open to review through a deemed change in circumstances.

Hearing From Children Directly

Courts could receive evidence straight from a child, in writing or through a private interview with an amicus curiae (a neutral lawyer who assists the court) present. Conditions would apply: it must serve the child's interests, both spouses must agree, and the court must be satisfied the child's safety and privacy are protected and there is no other suitable way to get the information.

Relocation Rules Would Shift

If a child spends the majority of their time with the parent who wants to move, the court would have to allow the move unless the other parent proves both that the move is not in the child's interests and that the child should live mainly with them. Courts would presume the moving parent will relocate whether or not the child may go, and could not weigh the parenting schedule the parties follow in their current homes.

What This Means for Separating Families in BC

For now, nothing changes. The current Divorce Act still governs divorce and parenting orders for married spouses, and BC's Family Law Act continues to apply to unmarried couples. Decisions made today should rest on the law as it stands, while keeping an eye on where C-223 goes.

If you have questions about divorce or parenting arrangements, our South Surrey team is here to help you understand your options. Book a free consultation.

This post is legal information, not legal advice.