We have been thinking about the potential future needs of the family justice system and the children and families who might be part of it. The following data story considers some of the demographic trends in England and Wales for the young people who may be the parents of tomorrow and the potential implications of those trends.
The data below has been analysed to focus on young people aged 16–24. However, as with all population-level data, this comes with limitations and caveats. Groups that engage with the family justice system may have specific characteristics and vulnerabilities that may not always be in line with wider population trends or may experience certain issues more acutely.
What do current demographic trends tell us?
Women are having fewer children and having them later in life
By 2021, pregnancy rates had halved among women under 24, and there has been a continued decrease in the number of live births in the lower age bands (under 20, 20–24 and 25–29) (Office for National Statistics (ONS) 2025).1
Over the last few years, the data appears to show an uptick in teenage pregnancy. However, this is explained by a large fall in numbers during COVID and overall rates remain below pre-pandemic levels. This decline in teenage pregnancy is one area that may have a tangible impact on the family justice system, as very young parents are at greater risk of being involved in public law proceedings.
We could assume that fewer babies overall might equal fewer children and families entering the family justice system. But whether this pattern will directly impact demand is less clear, particularly given changes in other drivers such as poverty, insecure housing and disability. We know that mothers who live in the 10% most deprived areas of England and Wales tend have more children than those in the least deprived areas of the country – but these proportions have remained steady for the past decade (ONS 2023).
By 2023, the average age of mothers was 30.9 (ONS 2023). Along with the increasing age of parenthood, there are more working mums and rising multigenerational demands. This raises questions about how an ageing population, older retirement age and a housing crisis may all be contributing to a changing picture regarding multigenerational living, parental support and caring responsibilities. As parents get older, so do grandparents; how might raising retirement ages and older grandparents impact the availability of kinship care and support?
How are cultural backgrounds and ethnicity changing?
Families are increasingly likely to have international origins and ties
Over the past 15 years, the proportion of children with parents not born in the UK has increased significantly. In 2024, 4 in 10 new babies had at least 1 parent born outside of the UK, while 27% had 2. The most common countries of origin for parents born outside of the UK were India, Pakistan, Nigeria, Romania and Bangladesh (ONS 2024).
What might families’ increasingly international lives mean for the family courts? Could it lead to a higher number of potential kinship carers who live abroad, relocation disputes after parents separate, or cases where immigration and family law intersect (see also the Nuffield Foundation-funded project, Immigrant families in the family justice system). Within the courts, how might this impact the demand for interpretation and translation services?
The parents of tomorrow will be a more diverse group
At the time of the last census, around a quarter of young people aged 16–24 were from minoritised ethnic groups – up from 13% in 2001 and 18% in 2011. The fastest-growing group is Mixed ethnicity, especially White and Asian (ONS 2023).2 What does the growing number of Mixed ethnicity families mean for children’s identity needs? How might it affect children’s experiences of foster care, adoption, kinship care, or child arrangements after separation?
We know from previous analysis that Mixed ethnicity families are overrepresented in the family courts, with the starkest disparities for White and Black Caribbean families in public law proceedings. Black Caribbean families are also significantly overrepresented in public law (Alrouh et al. 2022). Why are Black and Mixed ethnicity families overrepresented in public law proceedings? How does structural and interpersonal racism impact family experiences and outcomes within the family justice system? As the number of Mixed families continues to increase, how should the family justice system respond to these inequalities to prevent their further entrenchment?
And what are the links between racial inequalities in other statutory services and those in family justice (see, for example, Fitzpatrick et al. 2025; Wallace and Joseph-Salisbury 2021; HM Inspection of Probation 2021; Youth Justice Board 2021)?3
What about health and disability?
Reported disability has risen among young people, while access to support is diminishing
The percentage of young people reporting a disability has risen over the past decade. This increase has been seen across all types of disability and the reasons for this are likely to be a combination of factors including greater health inequalities alongside better identification and awareness. There is also a social gradient to disability: the proportion of young people in low-to middle-income families who are disabled has doubled over the past decade (Resolution Foundation 2025).
We know that having a disability presents multiple barriers to work and well-being, and that disabled families face higher rates of poverty than non-disabled families. Diminishing access to social support (such as removing the limited capability for work-related activity health element from Universal Credit for young people under the age of 22) means that these inequalities are likely to become further entrenched.
How might this affect the family justice system? The likelihood that parents will have a disability may become more common in both private and public law proceedings, requiring court adaptations and reasonable adjustments to ensure equitable access. However, experiences of disabled parents within the family justice system are not well understood; data relating to both children and adults is often incomplete, or not collected at all, particularly in private law.
Research has indicated that parents with learning difficulties are overrepresented within the family courts. Up to one-third of mothers in care proceedings have learning disabilities/difficulties (Burch et al. 2024), and the high percentage of children with special educational needs in care also suggests that disability is a common feature of the family justice system. However, does the system know how well it is meeting the needs of disabled parents? Will the increasing prevalence of disability require a change in the way the family court operates, communicates to, and includes parents and children? How can the family justice system support or account for the specific needs of disabled parents and children (e.g. in relation to work, housing and access to support)?
What impact will material hardship have?
Poverty levels are likely to remain stubbornly high
High levels of deprivation are known to play a role in families’ involvement in the family justice system (Webb 2025). Many of tomorrow’s parents will likely face economic insecurity; increasing cost of living pressures have already impacted young people during their childhoods and may continue to affect them and their own children. Around 1 in 3 children are in poverty and poverty rates are particularly high for lone-parent families (44%) (Department for Work and Pensions 2024). Children living in material deprivation – the inability to afford basic goods, services and activities – is currently also at a high of 28%.4 Although there will likely be reductions in child poverty following the lifting of the two-child benefit cap, the constrained spending environment for local and national government means that support and services that can help families in hardship will remain severely reduced.
Tomorrow’s parents face escalating housing insecurity
Housing and deprivation are often underlying factors in both private and public law. The proportion of families living in both social and owner-occupied housing has been falling since the early 2000s. Instead, families have moved into the insecure private rented sector: the proportion of families in private rented housing has increased from 10% to around 25%. Against this backdrop, a growing number of families – particularly single-parent families – spend long periods of time in temporary accommodation (Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government 2025).
As these problems persist, how well is the family justice system equipped for conflict and neglect that are underpinned by material hardship? How well can it work in a multi-agency and problem-solving way to help these factors?
There are also further questions about how this will this play out in both care proceedings and private family proceedings (e.g. the appropriateness of making arrangements for a child to visit, live or stay with a parent who may not have appropriate accommodation – such as in shared multi-occupancy housing). We don’t know what the psychological impact of a childhood spent in temporary accommodation is, or how this might affect a young adult as they start a family themselves.
These concerns may become a more prominent feature of public and private law cases as the housing shortage intensifies and as cost of living difficulties persist. What is the role of family justice system in helping families with their housing and material needs, at the pre-proceedings stage or within proceedings? How might this work in problem-solving approaches such as in the Family Drug and Alcohol Court, which aims to draw in multi-agency input (such as housing) where needed? Or in the Pathfinder approach in private law (a new, problem-solving approach to family proceedings that takes a multi-agency approach to improving coordination between the family court and agencies such as local authorities)?
How are interpersonal challenges and risks changing?
Factors such as domestic abuse, substance misuse and mental ill-health put some families at higher risk of being involved in the family justice system. Separated people, single parents and young adult women are the most likely to experience domestic abuse and are overrepresented in the family justice system, as are those with substance misuse issues. And while levels of alcohol and drug misuse are falling, instances of mental ill-health have been rising.
Domestic abuse is high among groups at risk of family justice involvement
Data from the Crime Survey for England and Wales (which gives us an estimate of prevalence of domestic abuse, rather than just those that are reported to law enforcement or come before the family courts), suggests that up to a quarter of separated people and single parents have recent experiences of domestic abuse. In 2024/25, rates were especially high for single parents, separated people, and young women under the age of 25 (ONS Centre for Crime and Justice 2025).5
Since 2025, the Crime Survey has also published data on abuse scales. This data groups respondents based on the number of abusive behaviours they experience and the impact of the abuse. It finds that women are more likely than men to have experienced repeated abusive behaviour that has impacted them in multiple ways (ONS Centre for Crime and Justice 2025). A substantial minority of care-experienced women – 27.5% – reported that they had experienced repeated abusive behaviour and had been impacted in multiple ways by the abuse (ONS Centre for Crime and Justice 2025).6
Domestic abuse has long been a feature of family law cases. In its first national monitoring report on domestic abuse in the family courts, the Domestic Abuse Commissioner found that domestic abuse concerns were raised in around 9 in 10 closed cases and nearly three-quarters of observed cases (Burton and Hunter 2025). The Crime Survey data suggests that this pattern is likely to continue: domestic abuse remains common among those most vulnerable to involvement with the family justice system, and families that have experienced abuse may well need the protection of a court order.
However, there are significant gaps in understanding how effectively the family justice system serves those with experiences of domestic abuse. For example, what is the overlap between families that separate in the context of domestic abuse and the small proportion of separating families (roughly 10%) who go to court to make arrangements for their children (Saied-Tessier 2023)? Are the arrangements that families are making outside of court safe? What is the relationship between single parenthood and experiences of abuse? Are there differences in the experiences of single mothers and single fathers?
We can also think about this data in the context of public law. Compared to a matched comparison group, mothers in care proceedings are 17 times more likely to have been admitted to hospital after experiencing violence (Ireland et al. 2024). The characteristics of parents in care proceedings may make them more vulnerable to abuse – for example, being a young adult woman, care experienced or a single parent.
Substance misuse overall is falling, while mental ill-health is rising
There is a general downward trend in problematic alcohol use among young people. Young people are drinking much less than in previous generations. Only 16% of those aged 16–24 reported dangerous levels of drinking in 2023/24, down from a third in 2000. Overall, 2% of young people reported levels of drinking that might require specialist intervention and treatment, down from over 5% in 2000 (NHS 2025). It should be noted however, that recent data from the Millennium Cohort Study suggests a slightly different trend. For Gen Z, although substance and alcohol consumption appears to be lower in their teenage years, there is some evidence this is increasing by the time they reach 23. Long-term tracking is needed to see if these trends continue.
While the parents of tomorrow are less likely to be dependent on alcohol, they are more likely to be dependent on cannabis. Since the late 2000s, cannabis dependence has been more common than harmful or dependent drinking among young people. Other forms of drug dependence have increased for adults over the age of 25 but have fallen among those aged 16–24 (NHS 2025).
Substance misuse is often a substantive factor in care proceedings. Given these trends, can we expect to see fewer young parents – particularly in public law proceedings – who are dependent on alcohol or (non-cannabis) drugs? However, as cannabis use increases, will a growing number of families in court be dependent on cannabis? How does this affect their experiences of the support they receive?
Rising mental ill-health has been well documented across the population. Data from the Adult Psychiatric Morbidity Survey suggests that 1 in 4 young people aged 16–24 (25.8%) have a common mental health condition – an increase from 15% in 2000. This is far higher for young women (26.1%) than men (16.3%). For acute and serious mental health conditions, such as post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), psychosis, borderline personality disorder (BPD) or bipolar disorder, the picture is more stable (although longitudinal data is more limited) but still indicates that many young people have psychiatric symptoms linked to trauma. The survey estimates that 1 in 10 young men and 13% of young women currently have PTSD symptoms. Further, it estimates that 1 in 10 young women have symptoms of BPD, which is also strongly linked to trauma (NHS 2025).
There are significant socioeconomic differences in both the prevalence of mental health conditions and access to services. Those in the most deprived areas face the largest barriers to accessing support. In the most deprived areas, 39% of young people were unable to access mental health support, compared to 18% in the least deprived areas (Resolution Foundation 2024).
Mental health is a known risk factor for involvement in the family justice system, particularly in public law. One key question is how the rising mental health problems may affect demand within the family courts, particularly in public law cases (Warner et al. 2024). Given the increasing prevalence of conditions such as anxiety and depression, and the pressures on mental health services, tomorrow’s parents may have more longstanding (and potentially untreated) mental health concerns. This has implications for the family courts in terms of the need for significant adaptations to better meet families’ needs. Aside from increasing demand, the family justice system may also need to consider how parents with histories of trauma might experience court proceedings. How might the family justice system become more trauma-informed?
What might this mean for the family justice system?
Across the general population, we can expect to see a more diverse range of families in terms of ethnicity, migration and family form. More parents will be from Mixed ethnicities, more parents will have been born outside of the UK and parents will generally be older when they have their first child.
Data suggests that the parents of tomorrow will likely have lower rates of drug and alcohol misuse. However, many will have spent their teenage years dealing with poverty, housing insecurity, mental ill-health and disability.
These environmental stress factors may make parenting more difficult or lead to conflict that requires private law proceedings or increased scrutiny from statutory services.
The complexity of these factors may lead to safeguarding and proceedings taking longer, requiring more problem-solving approaches to deal with multi-layered vulnerability. There is also a danger of the ‘residual’ cases – those that present with individual high-risk factors, being seen as ‘done deals’. Instead, in light of these challenges, it is more important than ever to support a family justice system that treats families fairly and equitably, accommodating needs and experiences so that people can truly access ‘justice’ within the system.
1 In keeping with ONS terminology, we refer to ’women’ and ’mothers’. These categories may also include individuals with different gender identities, such as non-binary people and transgender men.
2 We are using the five ‘high-level’ ethnic group categories from the census in this analysis: Asian, Black, Mixed, White and Other.
3 The literature describes historical and present-day discrimination across housing, education and youth justice, particularly for Black and Mixed children and their families. It is worth noting that structural advantage, racism and discrimination can shape families’ experiences over multiple generations.
4 A methodology change in 2023/24 means that this measure may not be comparable to previous years.
5 The ‘single parent’ category describes parents whose children live with them for all or most of the time. In interpreting this data, it is worth bearing in mind that single fathers make up a much smaller proportion of respondents (and of the population) than single mothers: 52 single fathers responded to the Crime Survey in 2024/25, compared to 534 single mothers.
6 6% of care-experienced men were in this cluster. There were 99 care-experienced women and 87 care-experienced men in the sample.
Notes on the data:
The data has been analysed to focus on young people aged 16–24 who may be the parents of tomorrow. However, all population-level data comes with limitations and caveats. Population-level (census) data is known to exclude certain groups disproportionately (such as those with special educational needs and disabilities, those who are homeless or some ethnic minorities), and some trends that are observed in young people may not persist into adulthood (e.g. young people consistently score higher on some mental health screening tools, and are more likely to be out of work).
Groups that engage with the family justice system also have specific characteristics and vulnerabilities that may not be in line with wider population trends, and so some of these assumptions may not always mirror directly what is seen at a population-level reading.
