Restricting a child’s contact with a parent is a serious step that courts take only when it is in the child’s best interests. What situations can lead to such a decision? What does the parent have to prove, what options does the law offer and how does the court decide?
Restricting a child’s contact with a parent is a fundamental measure that the court will only take if it is proven that the contact is likely to cause physical, psychological or emotional harm to the child. The most common grounds include abuse, exploitation, substance dependence, severe mental health problems or violent behaviour towards the other parent that causes trauma to the child. Repeated neglect of the child’s basic needs, lack of interest in the child, or manipulation and conflict that negatively affects the child can also lead to contact restrictions.
Each case is assessed on an individual basis, taking into account the best interests of the child, which is the key criterion. The court shall take into account the overall situation, including the age of the child, his or her relationship with both parents, the emotional and physical stability of the environment that the parents can offer him or her, and any risk that might arise from continued contact. At the same time, the child has the right to have contact with both parents if the circumstances allow and it is safe to do so.
The aim of restricting or preventing contact is to ensure the protection of the child and to create a stable and harmonious environment for the child. Court decisions seek to strike a balance between protecting the child and preserving his or her relationship with both parents. The legal framework for these measures is laid down in the Civil Code (Articles 888 and 891), which clearly states that the restriction of access must always serve the best interests of the child. In addition to protecting the child, judicial intervention should also help to minimise conflicts between the parents and provide guidance to the family on how to organise the relationship so that the child is least affected by tensions and disputes.
Parents should also seek support from other professionals, such as child psychologists, who can help the child cope with a challenging situation.
Are you dealing with child support for your child?
We will amicably and vigorously advocate in the courtroom to secure the highest child support (or modification) so that you and your children do not go broke. Likewise, we will help you in situations where you cannot meet the exorbitant child support demands.
Tip: When a beloved child disappears from hour to hour, you find yourself in a seemingly hopeless situation. Despair, fear and sadness are the main emotions that take over. Even worse are cases where the other parent is behind the abduction. How does the law view the issue of child abduction in the Czech Republic and how widespread is this phenomenon in our country? This is the subject of a separate article.
The court’s decision to restrict or prohibit a child’s contact with a parent is always the result of a careful assessment of the particular situation. The law says that if the parents do not agree, or if the interests of the child’s upbringing and family circumstances require it, the court will regulate the parent’s contact with the child. The court process starts with a petition, usually filed by the custodial parent, who must give specific reasons and provide evidence, such as reports from doctors, psychologists or social workers. In some cases, the child welfare authority(OSPOD) may initiate the restriction of contact if it assesses the situation as risky.
In making its decision, the court takes into account the best interests of the child, which includes his or her safety, stability and healthy development. It examines not only the current situation, but also the risk of future danger if the contact continues. The court may also hear the child if he or she is mature enough to express his or her views.
The court’s decision must always be supported by evidence and adapted to the particular circumstances in order to be consistent with the protection of the rights of the child and the parents. A parent seeking a restriction or prohibition of contact must provide, for example, reports from doctors, psychologists, social workers or witnesses. In crisis situations, an application for an interim measure may be made to allow immediate temporary restriction of access.
Prohibiting a child’s contact with a parent is one of the most serious interferences with parental rights and is only resorted to by the court as a measure of last resort if there is no other solution to ensure the child’s safety. In most cases, the court opts rather for a partial restriction of contact, which allows to maintain some form of contact between the parent and the child.
The courts have the possibility to restrict contact in various ways, for example by ordering assisted contact in the presence of a professional or in a neutral environment. In extreme cases, contact may be prohibited altogether.
In the case of assisted contact , contact between the parent and the child takes place in the presence of a third party, such as a social worker, a paedopsychologist or other professional. This type of contact is appropriate in cases where there is concern about the negative influence of the parent on the child, but a complete prohibition of contact would not be in the child’s interest. Assisted contact allows not only the protection of the child but also work to restore the broken relationship between parent and child.
Another option for modification may be to limit the time of contact, for example by shortening the duration of meetings, prohibiting sleepovers or extending the intervals between meetings. The court may also impose specific conditions, such as an obligation on the parent to refrain from inappropriate behaviour during contact.
The aim of these measures is to balance the child’s right to have contact with both parents with his or her need for security and stability. It is always an individual decision which reflects the specific circumstances and the best interests of the child.
Ms Catherine, mother of six-year-old Adam, contacted the Available Advocate about a serious situation concerning her ex-husband’s contact with their son. Adam’s father had long struggled with alcohol addiction, which led to repeated incidents during contact with the child. Adam would return frightened after these visits and would tell his mother about dangerous situations where his father was unable to care for him. There were times when he and his father lost each other downtown, or when his father fell asleep and could not be awakened while cooking lunch on the gas stove. The situation came to a head when Peter was intoxicated on one of his visits and driving a car with his child in it.
We helped Mrs. Katherine prepare a motion to limit the father’s contact with his son. We gathered all relevant evidence, including medical reports, testimony from neighbors, and reports from the child welfare agency(OSPOD). We also recommended that Katerina seek the help of a child psychologist, whose report confirmed the negative impact of the father’s behavior on Adam.
We submitted a motion to the court, including a request for an interim order, to temporarily limit the father’s contact to assisted contact in the presence of a social worker. The court accepted our motions and issued an order limiting Peter’s contact to two-hour assisted visits every two weeks. It also stipulated that Peter must undergo addiction treatment in order for the scope of contact to be reconsidered in the future.
The case law on limiting or prohibiting a child’s contact with a parent provides important guidance on how the courts approach these situations. A key consideration in all decisions is the best interests of the child, which includes protecting the child from physical, psychological or emotional harm.
For example, in the Constitutional Court’s ruling in Case No. II ÚS 1191/17, the court confirmed that a deviation from the principle of broad contact between a child and both parents is possible if there are serious circumstances, such as a threat to the child’s health. In its decision, the Court emphasized that the best interests of the child are superior to the rights of a parent to personal contact.
According to the Constitutional Court, “The right of parents to care for and participate equally in the upbringing of the child is in principle the right of the child himself to the care of both parents. If a child is entrusted by a court order to the care of one parent, that child should be allowed to have access to the other parent to such an extent that the postulate of equal parental care is fulfilled as far as possible. There are, however, exceptions to this principle justified by the protection of another sufficiently strong legitimate interest, such as the specific health of the minor child as an objective criterion for assessing the grounds for a change of circumstances, which must be sufficiently strong in all aspects relevant to parental care.”
Another important decision, Case No. III. ÚS 2427/14, focused on situations where the court must carefully examine the risk of endangering the child. Here, the Constitutional Court stated that in case of doubts about the safety of the child, it is possible to limit contact or order assisted contact under the supervision of experts.
The case-law also points out that a total ban on contact is a last resort and should only be chosen when the child cannot be protected in any other way.
Restricting a child’s contact with a parent is a fundamental measure which the courts take only in cases where it is necessary to protect the child from physical, psychological or emotional harm. The most common grounds include abuse, exploitation, substance dependence, serious mental health problems or violent behaviour towards the other parent. Other reasons include repeated neglect of the child’s basic needs, manipulation or conflict that negatively affects the child, or even preventive intervention when there is a risk of danger. The court may decide on different variants of restriction, such as assisted contact under the supervision of a professional, time limitations on contact or, in extreme cases, a complete ban on contact. The courts’ decisions are always guided by the best interests of the child, with the aim of striking a balance between protecting the child and maintaining contact with both parents.
We can ensure a fair increase or adjustment in your alimony/child support payments, taking into account the financial situation of each party. Our experience will ensure your proposal has the highest chance of success in court. You may pay after services are provided.
Ondřej is the attorney who came up with the idea of providing legal services online. He's been earning his living through legal services for more than 10 years. He especially likes to help clients who may have given up hope in solving their legal issues at work, for example with real estate transfers or copyright licenses.
In person and online. Just choose the appropriate service or opt for an independent consultation when you are unsure.
