Insights & Articles

A Child’s Choice: The Role of Judicial Interviews in Determining a Child’s Views and Preferences

July 29, 2025July 9, 2025

Katrina Wiegers
Lawyer

This week in the Child’s Choice series we discuss an alternate way the court can garner the child’s perspective. We have so far discussed how age and maturity factor in to the determination of views and preferences, along with how an independent assessment through VOCR is viewed. A judicial interview of a child is a rare approach, as involving children directly in legal proceedings can have unintended emotional consequences. While judges have occasionally conducted private interviews to understand a child’s preferences, it is generally discouraged in parenting disputes. Instead, third-party professionals, such as VOCR, are increasingly used to gather insights without directly involving the child in the courtroom. Judicial interviews are only conducted in exceptional cases when a child is mature enough to express their views, but they are not common due to the potential stress they may cause, particularly in high-conflict situations.

Caselaw on Judicial Interviews

An interesting case from 2016, Eustace v. Eustace, illustrates when a judicial interview may be appropriate. In this case, the child was 13 years old, and the parents’ conflicting cultural backgrounds complicated the determination of what was best for the child. After conducting a judicial interview and considering the child’s preferences, the judge awarded primary parenting to the father. While this case is an example where a judicial interview helped inform the decision, it is an exception rather than the rule. Courts typically prefer to rely on neutral third-party assessments rather than directly interviewing children.

This is explicitly outlined in the case Wakaluk v. Wakaluk (1976) which further clarifies this stance, emphasizing that while it is not always inappropriate for a child to testify, such action should be discouraged unless specific factors justify it. Some of these factors include whether the dispute is narrow in scope, the child is sufficiently mature to understand the matter, and whether the child’s preferences are likely to significantly affect the outcome.

Using Experts to Understand Children’s Views

Given the potential risks of involving children directly, courts increasingly turn to third-party professionals–such as parenting assessors and parenting coordinators–to evaluate a child’s preferences in a neutral and supportive environment. These professionals are trained to assess the child’s emotional and psychological needs, ensuring that their input is gathered in a way that minimizes harm and is more likely to reflect the child’s true preferences.

In addition to professional assessments, courts may rely on reports from the Office of the Children’s Lawyer or other experts to better understand the child’s wishes. This approach allows the court to consider the child’s preferences without placing them in the difficult position.

Requesting a judicial interview of a child can be appropriate in some situations. If you or someone you know is struggling with the complexities of co parenting consulting with a knowledgeable family lawyer, like those at McKenzie Lake Lawyers, can help you navigate the complexities and advocate for your children.