We the undersigned would like to register our surprise and disapproval at the NSPCC briefing notes provided for MPs in the UK parliament during the Children and Adoption Bill regarding the presumption of contact between children and their parents.

These briefing notes are widely interpreted to mean that the NSPCC no longer agrees with the principle of contact between children and the non-resident parent, usually the father.

To support this change in policy the NSPCC has used the number of child deaths. The deliberate impression given by using this statistic is that fathers are responsible for these deaths and therefore should not be entitled to the presumption of contact. This argument does not follow.

The fact that the non-resident parent mainly kills children has no connection with the gender of the parent and it is misleading to use this statistic in this way. Further it is wrong to imply that both natural parents do not provide the best protection for their children.

It is commonly accepted by all the law enforcement agencies that the principal perpetrator of domestic child abuse is the stepfather or live-in boyfriend not the natural father. Whilst we applaud the policy for together trying to bring a full-stop to abuse wherever it may occur the NSPCC has a duty of care to children not to misrepresent the true situation and the former policy, which recognized the importance of both natural parents, commanded a great deal of support.

Any policy which fails to take into account the realities of modern day family life is bound to do a disservice and we implore the NSPCC to think again about the presumption of contact mentioned in the briefing notes provided for MPs if it really wants to bring child abuse to an end.

Kingsley Miller has participated in helping with voluntary collections on behalf of the NSPCC. He is the author of 'even Toddlers Need Fathers' which Professor Sir Michael Rutter, a foremost authority on children's welfare, described as an 'interesting and informative guide'. In July 2004 he was given permission by the Court of Appeal to publish the County Court judgments from the family proceedings in his case because of his, 'history of responsible campaigning and writing on issues relating to family relationships' - 'I am very grateful to all those, like yourself who have written and particularly where you have been able to demonstrate your own thinking from the experiences you have had. Congratulations on your battle.' David Blunkett, Home Secretary 2001-2004.