The child hearing plays an increasingly important role within family law. For a long time, a fixed statutory age limit of twelve years applied: in principle, children from that age onwards were given the opportunity by the court to express their views in proceedings that directly concerned them. In practice, however, there was a growing realisation that a child’s ability to form and express their own opinion is not strictly dependent on age alone.

This development has now led to a significant change in case law. Since 1 January 2025, children from the age of eight have also been invited as a matter of course to a child hearing at the courts of appeal. From 1 July 2025, this will also apply to proceedings in the district courts. This shifts the starting point within family law from a strict age limit to an approach in which the child’s development, communication skills and individual situation take centre stage.

For parents and others involved in family law proceedings, it is important to know when and how a child is heard and what significance this may have for the assessment of the case. This development also raises legal questions, as the statutory provision in Article 809 of the Code of Civil Procedure still assumes an age limit of twelve years, whilst case law now applies a broader practical standard from the age of eight.

This article discusses how the child interview is regulated in law, why the age limit has been lowered, and what consequences this development has for children, parents and professionals within family law.

What does the child interview entail?

In family law proceedings that directly concern them, a minor may be invited to a hearing with the judge. During this child hearing, the child is given the opportunity to express their views. This can be done orally during a hearing with the judge, but also in writing, for example via a letter or email. Participation in the hearing is not compulsory.

The aim of the child interview is to actively involve minors in proceedings that may have far-reaching consequences for their daily lives, such as cases concerning parental authority, access or primary residence. The judge may take the information from the interview into account when assessing the case, with the child’s views being considered in light of their age and development.

The interview takes place without the presence of parents or carers, so that the child can speak freely. In doing so, the judge usually also discusses what information from the interview may be shared with the parents and other parties to the proceedings. During the hearing, the judge then usually provides a factual summary of what was discussed, provided the child consents to this.

The legal framework

A minor’s right to be heard is firmly enshrined in both national and international legislation. In the Netherlands, this is laid down in Article 809 of the Code of Civil Procedure and various provisions of the Civil Code. Internationally, this right derives, among other things, from Article 12 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), which stipulates that children capable of forming their own views have the right to express those views freely in matters affecting them.

Dutch law still explicitly refers to the age of twelve as the starting point for hearing minors. The recent reduction to eight years of age is therefore not the result of a legislative amendment, but of a policy adjustment within the rules of procedure themselves. The Council for the Judiciary has decided to extend the practice of inviting children to hearings to younger children, partly in response to positive experiences from pilot schemes at various courts, including the Amsterdam District Court.

The judiciary is thus aligning itself more closely with the principles of Article 12 of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, which focuses not on age but on the extent to which a child is capable of forming and expressing his or her views. The reduction to eight years of age therefore reflects a shift from a formal age-based approach to a more development-oriented approach.

Why was the age limit under discussion?

The age limit of twelve years had been under discussion in legal literature and practice for some time. Critics pointed out that this limit was too rigid and did not sufficiently reflect scientific insights into child development.

Educational and neurological research shows that even younger children are often well able to articulate their experiences, wishes and concerns, provided they are guided in an appropriate manner. Factors such as clear explanations, a safe environment and age-appropriate communication play an important role in this.

These insights were confirmed in practice. For instance, pilot schemes at various courts showed that children aged between eight and eleven were generally able to articulate what was important to them. Judges also noted that younger children often felt taken seriously when given the opportunity to tell their story.

The lowering of the age limit should therefore not be seen as a purely administrative change, but as part of a broader development in which the position of the child within family law is strengthened.

Application in Dutch case law

However, the lowering of the age limit does not mean that every eight-year-old child is automatically heard in the same way as a sixteen-year-old. The judge continues to assess the best way for the interview with the child to take place and the extent to which the child is capable of forming and expressing his or her own opinion.

With younger children, therefore, extra attention is often paid to the structure of the interview. Judges use simpler language, take more time to explain things and create an informal setting in which the child feels safe. Careful consideration is also given to the burden that participation may place on the child. Preventing loyalty issues or feelings of responsibility remains an important consideration in this regard.

Furthermore, the opinion of a young child does not automatically carry the same legal weight as that of an older child. The judge always assesses the weight to be given to the child’s statement, taking into account their age, development and the circumstances of the case. Lowering the age limit therefore primarily means that younger children are given a say in the proceedings at an earlier stage, not that they are given a decisive role in the outcome.

Consequences for parents and professionals

The lowering of the age limit also has practical implications for parents and professionals within family law. For parents, this means that children aged between eight and eleven may increasingly receive an invitation from the court or the court of appeal for a child interview. Parents are expected to explain the purpose of the interview to their child in a neutral manner, without directing the child on what to say.

Lawyers also have an important supporting role in this regard. They are expected to inform parents about the purpose and significance of the child interview, as well as how a child can be prepared for it.

Conclusion

The lowering of the age limit for the child interview demonstrates that family law is increasingly moving towards a development-oriented approach, in which the child’s potential is central. At the same time, the question remains as to what extent this development will ultimately affect the current legal framework.

The experienced family law solicitors at SPEE advocaten & mediation are happy to advise you on the role of the child interview within your specific situation and to guide you through family law proceedings, with your child’s best interests at the heart of the process.