header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
04 February 2011 / Juliet Carp
Issue: 7451 / Categories: Features , Family
printer mail-detail

Justice for fathers?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Juliet Carp welcomes a new addition to the family—transferable maternity leave

Politicians have been talking for a long time about letting families decide how fathers and mothers should split leave after a baby is born. The Additional Paternity Leave Regulations 2010 (SI 2010/1055) are finally due to come into force for families whose babies are due on or after 3 April 2011. This will allow up to 26 weeks’ “additional maternity leave” to be transferred to a baby’s father after the mother has returned to work. (Similar arrangements apply to same sex families and adopting families.)

Upside

The new legislation offers some positive benefits. Clearly, many fathers will have greater opportunity to spend time with their new babies (and older siblings) and, at a more practical level, this could give families where the mother earns more than the father a chance to make some financial savings. Many comment that, given typical disparities in earning power, most fathers will not take up the offer of additional paternity leave. However, that rather misses the point. Large

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Partner joinscorporate and finance practice in British Virgin Islands

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Firm strengthens children department with adoption and surrogacy expert

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Media and technology expert joins employment team as partner in Cambridge

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll