The child interview: space for the child's voice

What a child interview is for

In cases involving divorce, parental authority or contact, among other matters, a child can explain what matters in daily life. The judge wants to hear the child's own experience. This may concern housing, school, transport or how arrangements feel. The conversation is not an assignment to assess an entire adult conflict legally.

Explain that a child does not need to choose between parents to be heard. A view can matter without being decisive. The judge must also consider other circumstances. A decision departing from a wish therefore does not automatically mean the child was not taken seriously or did the interview incorrectly.

The invitation and current age information

Rechtspraak states that children from age eight receive an invitation for a child interview. The same information refers to age sixteen in maintenance cases. Read the personal letter carefully for practical details and contact the court if anything is unclear. Do not substitute an older general page with a different age for current procedural information.

An invitation does not make participation compulsory. A child can also send a letter or email. If the proposed appointment is unsuitable, Rechtspraak describes contacting the court to discuss another appointment. Check the practical route in the invitation and do not send personal information to an arbitrary online form.

What happens during the conversation

The interview is informal. Rechtspraak explains that a judge and court clerk are present and that parents or carers are not. Children usually speak separately from their siblings. The setting and approach aim to help the child feel comfortable enough to speak, without the atmosphere of an ordinary public court hearing.

A trusted person can accompany the child to court but is usually not present at the interview itself. The child can ask about possibilities if support is wanted. Do not promise another person's presence without checking. Where there are specific needs, asking the court in advance is more useful than arriving with an unverified expectation on the day.

Preparing differs from rehearsing what to say

According to Rechtspraak, a child does not need to rehearse or memorise documents. It can help to consider what matters beforehand. Parents can answer practical questions and look at official information for children. Allow the child to use their own words and express uncertainty or mixed feelings.

Avoid a rehearsed account, questioning afterwards or suggesting that a parent will be disappointed by a particular view. The child does not have to defend a party's position. A neutral question asks what they would like the judge to understand; a leading question already supplies the desired answer. Seek suitable help if anxiety makes participation difficult.

A letter or email as an alternative

Children who prefer writing can tell the judge what matters that way. Follow the court's details and instructions. The purpose remains the child's own account, rather than a parent's legal argument bearing the child's signature. Support should aid understanding without taking over the content.

A letter in an ongoing case and the informal route for a child to approach the court are related but distinct situations. Through the informal route, a child can send a question or wish directly to a judge. Rechtspraak describes examples and possible next steps. If uncertain, ask which route fits instead of treating every child's letter as the same procedural document.

Hypothetical example: a child wants both parents to be happy

Suppose a child says they want equal time with everyone because otherwise someone will be sad. A calm explanation is that adults are responsible for their own feelings and decisions. The conversation can also concern practical experiences, such as school equipment, sleep or long journeys, without immediately requiring a definitive choice.

The example is not a diagnosis and does not predict the judge's decision. It shows why a child needs space to express complicated feelings. Do not ask which answer offers the best chance of a desired outcome. Parents experiencing considerable tension can seek their own support instead of placing that burden on the child.

After the interview: no interrogation at home

Rechtspraak states that the judge gives a short summary at the hearing and parents do not receive a detailed account of everything said. Do not expect the child to repeat every word at home. Let them decide whether to share anything and keep responsibility for further legal questions with adults.

Discuss procedural questions with the lawyer and practical concerns with appropriate support services. The child interview does not automatically end proceedings or independently create a new schedule. The judge may weigh matters differently from what one participant hopes. Explain an outcome appropriately without making the child responsible for the decision or for disappointing a parent.

Practical checklist

• Read the invitation and practical details together calmly.
• Use current official information about the conversation.
• Explain that the child does not have to choose or decide.
• Ask in advance about possibilities for additional support.
• Respect a preference to write or not attend.
• Discuss adult procedural questions with the lawyer.