Preventing a Parent from Having Contact with Their Child: What Should You Do?

Quick Overview: People still usethe term “obstruction of contact,” but as of 2026, it is more accurate to refer to the obstruction of the other parent’s care, contact with the child, or indirect contact. A child has the right to equal care from both parents. The parent with whom the child currently resides must properly prepare the child for the other parent’s care, facilitate that care, and cooperate. Unjustified, persistent, or repeated obstruction of care is grounds for a new court decision regarding the child’s living arrangements.

What has changed since 2026: it is no longer a matter of “shared” or “sole” custody

Following the amendment effective as of January 1, 2026, it is more accurate to speak of obstructing the other parent’s care—or, where applicable, of preventing the child from having contact with that parent—rather than “obstructing contact.”

Previously, courts decided whether a child would be in the sole custody of one parent, shared custody, or joint custody. Starting in 2026, this terminology will be phased out. Under the new rules, if the parents cannot agree that the child will remain in the care of both parents without specifying the extent of each parent’s care, the court will determine the extent of each parent’s care based on the child’s best interests.

However, this does not mean that “half-and-half” custody will automatically be implemented in all cases. The Constitutional Court emphasized as early as 2026 that equality of custody should not be confused with equal distribution. The court must determine an appropriate division of custody based on the best interests of the specific child. A transitional rule is also important. Older decisions that refer to placing a child in the custody of one parent, alternating custody, or joint custody were not automatically revoked as of January 1, 2026. They remain in effect. They may be modified if circumstances change.

Example: A 2024court ruling states that the child is in the mother’s sole custody and the father has visitation every other weekend. As of 2026, this judgment has not automatically been revoked. However, if the mother consistently fails to hand the child over to the father without cause, this may constitute grounds for filing a motion for a new decision regarding the child’s living arrangements.

Why Parents Prevent Custody or Contact with Their Child

Preventing a child from having contact with the other parent is often a continuation of the conflict that led to the separation or divorce. The parent with whom the child currently lives may feel that they are losing control, fear the other parent’s influence, distrust them, or be trying to “protect” the child from an environment they consider unsuitable.

Sometimes these are genuine concerns. For example, when the other parent drinks, uses drugs, behaves violently, neglects the child, or exposes the child to risky situations. At other times, however, it is not about protecting the child, but rather about carrying the conflict between the partners into their parenting.

The following are considered problematic, for example:

• repeatedly disrupting child custody arrangements without a serious reason,
• claiming that “the child doesn’t want to go” without the parent making any effort to facilitate contact,
• failing to prepare the child for the other parent’s care,
• withholding information about school, doctors, or extracurricular activities,
• negatively influencing the child against the other parent,
• refusing phone calls, video calls, or messages while the other parent is caring for the child,
• deliberately scheduling activities during times when the other parent is supposed to be caring for the child.

The Civil Code explicitly states that if parents do not live together, they must refrain from anything that disrupts the child’s relationship with the other parent or that hinders the child’s upbringing.

This does not mean that a parent must hand over the child at all costs, even in a dangerous situation. If the child is seriously ill, the other parent arrives intoxicated, threatens violence, or there is another immediate risk, it is appropriate to act cautiously. However, the parent should document the situation and contact the Social and Legal Protection of Children (OSPOD), the police, or the court as soon as possible. Unilateral and prolonged “suspension of contact” without a court ruling is very risky.

What to Do If the Other Parent Refuses to Hand Over the Child

The first step should be practical and calm: determine whether this is a one-time problem or a recurring pattern. Sometimes parents fail to comply due to the child’s illness, transportation issues, or a misunderstanding. Other times, it is a systematic obstruction of custody.

Recommended steps:

1. Write objectively and concisely. Communicate with the other parent in writing, ideally via email or a message that can be documented later. Do not include insults or threats.
2. Propose specific solutions. For example, an alternative date, a different drop-off location, handover via a third party, or a temporarily shorter visitation schedule.
3. Contact OSPOD. OSPOD can advise the parents, facilitate negotiations, recommend professional help, and assist in establishing a practical method for handing over the child.
4. Consider mediation or professional help. In conflicts that do not involve violence or a serious threat to the child, a mediator, family therapist, or coordinated parenting discussion may be helpful.
5. File a petition with the court. If the agreement is not working, the matter must be resolved in court. Depending on the situation, this may involve a petition to establish the child’s living arrangements, a motion to modify an existing order, a motion for a temporary order, or a motion to enforce a judgment.

If there is no enforceable decision or court-approved agreement, you cannot immediately request enforcement of a decision. First, you must obtain a decision that establishes the scope of custody, or, where applicable, the conditions of custody or indirect contact.

Starting in 2026, the court will also have the option of issuing a provisional ruling, which will apply when emergency intervention under a special preliminary measure is not necessary, but it is in the child’s best interest to temporarily adjust the arrangements. The Ministry of Justice explains that before a provisional decision is issued, parents should have the opportunity to express their views in order to limit the “element of surprise,” which has often further escalated the conflict.

Example: According to the agreement,the father was supposed to care for the child every Wednesday afternoon and every other weekend. The mother repeatedly refuses to hand over the child, claiming that “the child does not want to go,” but she does not offer alternative dates, does not prepare the child for the handover, and does not provide the father with information about school. The father should keep a record of their communications, contact the Social and Legal Protection of Children (OSPOD), and—depending on whether a court order exists—consider enforcing the order or filing a motion for a new arrangement.

When a Court Order Exists: Enforcement of the Order and Fines

If an enforceable court order or a court-approved agreement regarding custody or visitation already exists and the other parent is not complying with it, a parent may file a motion with the court to enforce the order.

The Act on Special Judicial Proceedings governs the enforcement of decisions regarding the custody of minor children. The court may first urge the parent to comply with the decision and inform them of the possibility of enforcing the decision by imposing fines or removing the child. The court may also request the Social and Legal Protection of Children Authority (OSPOD) to encourage the parent to comply voluntarily.

Subsequently, the court may impose a fine on anyone who fails to voluntarily comply with a court decision or a court-approved agreement. Enforcement by imposing a fine may be ordered repeatedly; each fine must be no less than 5,000 CZK and no more than 50,000 CZK. The fines are paid to the state.

However, a fine is not intended as revenge for the other parent’s “misbehavior.” The Constitutional Court has long emphasized that a fine for failure to hand over a child should be a tool to ensure compliance with an obligation, not a punishment. The court must therefore examine why the failure to provide care or visitation occurred and whether the parent was actually able to comply with the decision.

The court may also employ other measures. It may order an initial meeting with a registered mediator, establish an acclimatization plan, require that custody or visitation take place under the supervision of the Social and Legal Protection of Children (OSPOD), order a meeting with a specialist, or order substitute custody or visitation to the extent that the original arrangement was thwarted.

In extreme cases, the court may order the removal of the child and the child’s transfer to the person with whom the child is to reside according to the decision, or to the person to whom the decision grants visitation rights for a limited period. In the case of visitation for a limited period, the law expressly states that the removal of the child may be used only in exceptional cases.

Unjustified obstruction of custody may also lead to a modification of the decision

An amendment to the Civil Code effective in 2026 introduced a very important provision for these situations: if a parent unreasonably, persistently, or repeatedly prevents the other parent from caring for the child, such behavior constitutes grounds for a new court decision regarding the child’s living arrangements.

This is a significant shift. The court no longer needs to decide solely whether to impose a fine for each individual failed handover. It can assess whether the custody arrangement as a whole still serves the child’s best interests.

In practice, this could mean, for example:

• a more precise custody schedule,
• a change in the scope of each parent’s custody,
• adjusting the place and time of handover,
• establishing conditions for custody,
• the introduction of supervision by the Social and Legal Protection of Children Authority (OSPOD),
• restrictions on disruptive behavior by a parent,
• adjusting indirect contact and the exchange of information.

Under the new provisions, the court may also determine the conditions under which a parent cares for the child, such as the location where the parent may or may not care for the child, or the persons who may or may not be present during care. If it is in the child’s best interest, the court may also regulate the parent’s indirect contact with the child or the right to information about the child.

Example:A parent has long claimed that the child rejects the other parent, but at the same time disparages the other parent in front of the child, cancels phone calls, prevents messages from being sent, and refuses to seek recommended professional help. The court may conclude that the problem lies not only in individual missed visits but in the overall circumstances surrounding the child’s situation.

What if the child themselves rejects the other parent?

One of the most difficult situations arises when a child says they do not want to see the other parent. There is no automatic answer.

The court must examine the child’s age, maturity, reasons for the refusal, previous relationship with the parent, possible influence from others, fear, negative experiences, and whether the refusal is a result of conflict between the adults. The Constitutional Court has repeatedly emphasized that the child’s opinion is important but must be assessed in context. For older children, it generally carries more weight than for younger children.

A fine for failing to allow contact is not appropriate in cases where a parent does not influence the child against the other parent and is making an effort to fulfill the obligation, but the child strongly resists for reasons beyond the parent’s control. The Constitutional Court points out that the enforcement of a decision should not be a tool for forcibly changing the child’s will, unless the child’s attitude has been intentionally influenced by a third party.

However, this does not mean that a parent can simply say, “The child doesn’t want to,” and consider the matter closed. A parent must prepare the child for contact with the other parent, support the relationship, and refrain from anything that disrupts it. If a parent provokes or reinforces the child’s resistance, this may have serious legal consequences.

Based on practical experience, it is important to act quickly. The longer the child goes without seeing the other parent, the more difficult it tends to be to restore the relationship. It may be appropriate to arrange for gradual contact, involve a professional, arrange for assisted handoffs, or establish a temporary acclimatization plan.

When Can Preventing Contact Have Criminal Consequences?

Filinga criminal complaint should not be the first recourse in a routine parental dispute. In extreme cases, however, it may be appropriate.

The Criminal Code defines the offense of obstructing the enforcement of an official decision and a restraining order. Among others, a person commits this offense if they engage in serious conduct intended to obstruct the enforcement of a decision by another public authority concerning the upbringing of minor children. Such conduct is punishable by up to two years’ imprisonment.

Criminal liability applies particularly in cases of long-term, repeated, and intentional obstruction of a court decision, where civil remedies are insufficient.Typically, this involves situations where a parent repeatedly fails to comply with a court judgment, ignores court orders, obstructs the handover of a child, manipulates the child’s residence, or deliberately prevents the enforcement of the decision.

However, courts and law enforcement agencies must always assess the severity of the conduct. The Supreme Court, for example, has noted that it is necessary to evaluate not only the formal elements of the crime but also the degree of harm caused and the justification for criminal prosecution. Therefore, filing a criminal complaint makes sense primarily when there is an enforceable decision, the violation is repeated and verifiable, and civil remedies have failed.

What Evidence to Prepare

In disputes over obstruction of child custody, documentation is crucial. The court will not rely solely on a parent’s feeling that the other parent is “acting in bad faith.” It needs concrete facts.

In particular, keep the following:

• messages and emails regarding the handover arrangement,
• notices of canceled handover appointments,
• proposals for alternative dates and the other parent’s responses,
• records of when and where you were ready to pick up the child,
• confirmations from school, preschool, the doctor, or extracurricular activities,
• records from the Social and Legal Protection of Children (OSPOD),
• reports from mediation or professional counseling,
• testimony from individuals who were present during the handover,
• court decisions and court-approved agreements.

Gather evidence lawfully and with the child’s best interests in mind. It is not appropriate to interrogate the child, film them during an emotionally charged moment, or force them to “tell the truth on camera.” Such an approach can be distressing for the child and may backfire against the parent in court.

In practice, calm, factual, and time-specific documentation works best: when the handover was supposed to take place, what was agreed upon, who wrote what, what the reaction was, and what the impact on the child was.

Summary

Following the amendment, the concept of preventing a parent from having contact with a child must be understood differently starting in 2026. People still use old terms like “sole,” “alternating,” or “joint” custody, but the law now focuses primarily on the specific scope of each parent’s care and on the child’s right to equal care from both parents.

The parent with whom the child currently resides must prepare the child for the other parent’s care, facilitate that care, and cooperate. They must also refrain from anything that disrupts the child’s relationship with the other parent or hinders the child’s upbringing.

If the other parent repeatedly obstructs custody, it is appropriate to act quickly: communication, OSPOD, mediation, a petition to the court, or, if necessary, enforcement of the decision. The court may impose a fine, order professional assistance, establish a visitation schedule, modify the terms of custody, or, in extreme cases, order the removal of the child. Unjustified, persistent, or repeated obstruction of custody is in itself grounds for a new decision regarding the child’s living arrangements.