Parents’ evening is supposed to be one of the more straightforward parts of school life: a short conversation with a teacher about how a child is getting on. For separated parents, however, even a ten-minute appointment can raise difficult questions about boundaries, communication and what it really means to put a child first.

Should both parents attend together to demonstrate a united front? Is it better to arrange separate meetings if the relationship is strained? What responsibility does the school have to keep both parents informed? And what happens when attending together would be uncomfortable, destabilising or unsafe?

When Frolo asked single parents whether both parents should go to parents’ evening, the small but revealing set of responses exposed a wider problem with the way co-parenting is often discussed. The ideal of two separated parents calmly sitting beside one another is frequently presented as evidence of maturity and successful co-parenting. For some families, it is exactly that. For others, it is unrealistic, inappropriate or potentially harmful.

The important question is therefore not simply whether parents attend together. It is whether the arrangements allow both parents, where appropriate, to remain informed and involved without exposing the child or either parent to unnecessary conflict.

The appeal of presenting a united front

One parent responding to the Frolo Question said that she and her child’s other parent “really try hard to go together”, putting the children first rather than allowing their own disagreements to interfere.

There are clear advantages to this approach when the relationship between parents is sufficiently respectful. Both hear the same information directly from the teacher, can ask questions together and leave with a shared understanding of any concerns or next steps. It reduces the risk of information being selectively passed on, misunderstood or lost between households.

Attending together may also reassure a child that both parents remain interested in their education despite the separation. Gingerbread has previously advised that, where it is possible and appropriate, attending parents’ evening together can demonstrate continued involvement and keep communication between the family and school consistent. For children who worry that separation means one parent will gradually disappear from parts of their life, seeing both parents involved may feel stabilising. The NSPCC advises preserving as much continuity as possible following separation and reassuring children about what will remain unchanged. Ongoing involvement in school can form part of that continuity.

But a united front is only valuable when it is real enough to be sustainable. Two parents sitting in the same classroom while one feels intimidated, silenced or intensely anxious does not necessarily represent successful co-parenting. Nor does it automatically benefit the child.

When “putting the child first” becomes an unfair judgement

The original Frolo exchange became more interesting when another parent challenged the suggestion that attending separately might be the result of parents allowing their “egos or issues” to get in the way. She pointed out that some parents cannot attend together because of the particular circumstances of their separation. That inability, she said, is “not down to egos”.

This distinction matters. Advice about co-parenting often assumes that both adults have roughly equal power, that communication difficulties are mutual and that greater cooperation can be achieved if each person simply tries harder. That assumption does not hold in every family.

Some separated parents are dealing with high conflict, coercive control, harassment, restraining orders, ongoing court proceedings or a history of domestic abuse. In such circumstances, attending together may allow one parent to dominate the conversation, gather information about the other parent or use the appointment as another point of unwanted contact. The NSPCC is clear that domestic abuse can continue after a relationship ends and that children may be affected by abuse between adults even when they are not its direct target.

Even where there has been no abuse, a joint meeting can still be counterproductive. If parents are likely to contradict each other, argue about homework arrangements or use the teacher as an audience for wider grievances, separate appointments may create a calmer and more useful discussion.

The phrase “putting the child first” should not become a way of pressuring parents to perform friendliness. In some families, putting the child first means cooperating closely. In others, it means maintaining firm boundaries and minimising direct contact. It's useful here to consider the difference between co-parenting, parallel parenting and solo parenting. Co-parenting involves some degree of collaboration, while parallel parenting may be more suitable when parents cannot communicate effectively. In other families, safety concerns or the absence of the other parent mean that solo parenting is the only realistic arrangement.

Parents’ evening needs to accommodate all three realities.

What are separated parents entitled to know?

The legal and administrative position is often misunderstood. A child living mainly with one parent does not automatically mean that the other parent loses the right to receive information from the school. In England, parental responsibility includes legal rights and duties concerning a child’s upbringing and education. Separation itself does not remove parental responsibility. A parent with parental responsibility will generally remain entitled to information about their child’s education unless a court order, safeguarding issue or other legal restriction affects that position.

Department for Education guidance tells schools that they must treat parents fairly and should not become involved in disputes between separated parents. Schools should act in the child’s best interests, respect court orders and understand who holds parental responsibility. The guidance also makes clear that schools should not assume one parent can make all decisions or control the information given to another simply because the child lives primarily with them.

Parents’ evening is only one part of this. Reports, attendance information, notices about school events and significant concerns should not depend entirely on one parent forwarding messages to the other. Where both parents are entitled to information, schools need systems that recognise two households rather than treating one parent as the family administrator by default.

That may mean recording two email addresses, sending separate copies of reports or allowing both parents access to the school’s communication platform. It may also mean offering two parents’ evening appointments when a joint meeting is not suitable.

Schools should not expect one arrangement to fit every family

Schools can make this process either much easier or much more difficult.

A booking system offering only one appointment per child may work perfectly well for parents who attend together, but it creates an immediate obstacle for those who cannot. A parent may then have to explain private family circumstances to a receptionist or ask the other parent to relay what the teacher said.

More flexible systems could include separate appointments, a combination of in-person and online meetings, a written summary for a parent who cannot attend, or a longer joint appointment where both parents wish to participate remotely from different locations.

Schools also need a clear process for situations involving domestic abuse or safeguarding concerns. Staff should not disclose contact details, addresses, appointment times or other sensitive information without checking what restrictions are in place. They should follow court orders and safeguarding procedures rather than attempting to negotiate between parents themselves. Department for Education guidance recognises that conflict between separated parents is a frequent source of school complaints, which makes a consistent policy particularly important.

The aim should not be to encourage joint attendance at all costs. It should be to ensure that the child’s education remains the focus while both parents’ rights, responsibilities and safety are properly considered.

What if both parents want to attend separately?

Where communication is difficult but not unsafe, separate meetings can be an effective solution. Each parent has an opportunity to hear directly from the teacher, ask questions and understand how they can support the child in their own household.

This does create extra work for schools, particularly when teachers have limited appointment time. However, asking one parent to rely on the other for information can create its own problems. Important details may not be passed on, and the arrangement may reinforce an imbalance in which one parent becomes the official parent while the other is treated as peripheral.

A practical compromise might involve one full meeting and one shorter follow-up, or one parent attending live while the other receives an agreed written summary. What works will depend on the school’s resources and the circumstances of the family, but the principle should be that separation does not make a parent’s interest in their child’s education optional.

Where parents can communicate safely, they may also agree in advance which issues need to be raised. A brief written exchange focused specifically on the child can prevent duplication without requiring a level of personal contact that neither parent finds manageable.

Should children have a say?

The child’s age and views may also be relevant, although children should not be asked to decide which parent is allowed to attend.

Some children may like both parents to go together. Others may feel anxious at the prospect, particularly if they have previously witnessed tension between them. Older children may have strong views about how information concerning their school life is shared. Cafcass advises that arrangements following separation should be reviewed as children grow because their needs and wishes change. What works for a child in Reception may feel entirely different by the time they reach secondary school.

Listening to a child does not mean making them responsible for managing adult relationships. It means noticing whether the arrangement creates reassurance or apprehension and adjusting where possible. A child should not have to worry that parents’ evening will turn into an argument. Nor should they feel responsible for passing messages between households or protecting one parent from the other’s reaction.

A practical approach for separated parents

Where attending together is safe and reasonably comfortable, it can be helpful to agree beforehand that the conversation will remain focused on the child. Parents might separately note any questions and decide who will raise each one, particularly when appointments are short.

Where a joint appointment is not workable, parents can contact the school early rather than waiting until the booking system opens. A simple explanation that separate communication is required should normally be enough; schools do not need every detail of the separation unless it is relevant to safeguarding or a legal restriction.

It is also worth checking that both parents’ details are properly recorded and that both receive reports and routine communications. Parents should provide the school with copies of any relevant court orders and update it when arrangements change.

Where communication between parents is possible but fraught, keeping it brief, written and child-focused may help. Information about school can be shared without reopening arguments about the relationship. Where direct communication is unsafe, the school, a solicitor, a parenting app or another agreed channel may need to carry the necessary information instead.

Success does not always look like togetherness

The responses to the Frolo Question revealed two legitimate experiences. Some separated parents value attending parents’ evening together and see it as an important expression of shared support. Others need separate arrangements to protect boundaries, reduce conflict or remain safe.

Neither format is automatically better.

A child benefits from parents who take an interest in their education, but that interest does not have to be demonstrated by sitting in the same room. Sometimes effective co-parenting looks collaborative and visibly united. Sometimes it looks like two adults keeping their distance while each remains dependable and informed.

The most child-centred arrangement is not necessarily the one that looks most harmonious from the outside. It is the one that allows useful information to be exchanged, keeps adult conflict away from the child and gives everyone involved the best chance of concentrating on what parents’ evening is actually for: understanding how the child is doing and helping them move forward.

How does your family manage parents’ evenings after separation? Share your experience with other single parents on the Frolo app.

‍