KARACHI: The Sindh High Court (SHC) has observed that parental conflicts are badly affecting children’s mental well-being in multiple ways, and such trauma leaves deep scars on their psychological health and personality when these disputes land in court.
A single-judge bench of the SHC headed by Justice Muhammad Hasan Akber also noted that the only provision for protection of these children is available in the guardians and wards law, empowering the courts to pass any appropriate order for production, protection and interim measures regarding custody of minors.
However, such powers are, in the absence of regulated guidelines, left entirely at the discretion of the courts concerned, often resulting in additional difficulties for litigating parents and their children, it added.
The SHC further observed that the introduction of formalised, regulated and specific guidelines and rules applicable to every family court across the board, without any distinction, could help resolve such issues.
Bench recommends reforms to improve protection and welfare of minors; advises family courts to seek periodic reports to monitor their education and health
The bench made these observations while deciding a petition filed by a woman against her former husband, impugning the orders of the family and sessions courts about dower, dowry articles and monthly maintenance of their two children.
It noted that a crucial aspect that surfaced was the mental health of the children as they did not have any opportunity to meet their father, and, without dilating upon factual contentions between the parties, the court would focus on the larger issue of welfare, mental health and rights of minors.
It also observed that while guaranteeing the rights of a child, the Constitution imposes certain duties upon the state, including the protection of marriage, family, mother and the child while in 2024 the Supreme Court also provided guidelines in the case of Dr Muhammad Asif verses Dr Sana Sattar for harmonisation and transformation of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 and other child-related laws in line with the UN Convention on the Rights of Child, 1989.
The bench further said all parents need to understand that their inter-parental conflicts are badly affecting their children.
Numerous studies conducted on the subject matter around the globe have concluded that if parental conflicts are not resolved privately and within a shorter period, children suffer psychological distress, which raises high chances of developing fear, anxiety sadness, depression, insecurity, instability, emotional dysregulation, mood swings and impulsivity, which ultimately affect overall psychological adaptation and brain growth in children, it maintained.
It noted that when an inter-parental dispute enters the litigation phase, the trauma that children are already passing through leaves deep scars on their psychological health and personality, and under such circumstances, children require a secure and protected environment to prevent them from direct exposure to parental confrontation.
The bench also noted that the only protection available for such children is provided under Section 12 of the Guardians and Wards Act, empowering family courts to pass any appropriate orders for production, protection of and interim measures.
However, such powers are, without any regulated guidelines, leaving the entire exercise at the discretion of family courts, often resulting in additional difficulties for litigating parents and their children, it added.
“Piecemeal and incomplete orders regarding interim arrangements, without a holistic view and an overall arrangement for the child at one time, not only add to the financial burdens, logistical issues, multiplicity of litigation and consumption of precious time of the court and the litigating parents, but it also fuels adversity, hatred and uncertainty amongst the litigating parents. Ultimately, all this adversely affects the child in physical and psychological terms”, it added.
The order further noted that this could easily be resolved with the introduction of formalised, regulated and specific guidelines and rules applicable to every family case across the board, while the exercise of discretion could be narrowed to the extent of certain variables only depending upon the age, gender, mental maturity, health and opinion of the minor.
It stated that the family courts should consider the mental maturity, health, age and opinion of the minor, as well as seek periodic reports to monitor the education and health of the child.
Such an exercise at a preliminary stage, as a matter of rule, would give a sense of certainty among litigating parents and their children, save precious time of courts and parties and reduce litigation expenses, while the entire exercise would help in creating a more conducive atmosphere for children during the interim period, the order maintained.
The bench said that these suggestions were strongly recommended for consideration by all concerned for improvement in the family courts’ rules and the law, for the sake of child rights and the ultimate benefit of millions of children across the country.
Published in Dawn, March 23rd, 2026.
