What Happens If a Parent Won't Follow Parenting Orders?
- nichollealtitudeb2
- May 30
- 6 min read
Updated: Jun 2
When parents separate, court orders often help set clear expectations about where the children will live and when each parent gets time with them. These are known as parenting time/ access orders.
But what happens if one parent simply refuses to follow those rules?
The other parent can go back to court and argue that the behavior amounts to contempt of court, which is a serious legal matter.
But proving contempt in family law isn’t easy. Courts take these cases seriously, but also approach them carefully, especially when children are involved.
In this article, we’ll walk through how contempt works in parenting and child custody disputes, why it’s hard to prove, and how a skilled family law lawyer can help protect your rights and your child’s best interests.
What Is Contempt in Family Court?
Under Canadian law, someone is in contempt when they intentionally ignore a court order which gave clear directions.
But in family law, judges don’t rush to find someone in contempt. They want to make sure any action taken supports the child’s well-being and doesn’t worsen conflict between parents.
To prove contempt, you must show three key things:
1) The order was clear: There was no room for misunderstandings.
2) The parent knew about the order: They had a copy and understood what it required.
3) They chose not to follow it: This wasn’t an accident or oversight. It was deliberate.
Even if all three points are true, the judge still has discretion. If holding someone in contempt would hurt the child or unnecessarily increase tension between parents, the court may look for alternatives instead.
Let’s explore a real-life scenario of how such a case can evolve.
A Real-Life Example: Why One Contempt Case Was Dismissed
Let’s look at a 2024 case from Ontario, Carey v. Carey, 2024 ONSC 2516 (CanLII)
A father asked the court to hold the mother in contempt because she repeatedly denied him parenting time. He wanted the court to enforce the existing order and penalize her for non-compliance. He did this by way of a motion. The matter was not at the trial stage, where witnesses are typically called and their evidence tested at cross- examination.
Here’s what happened:
The couple had a custody agreement giving the mother primary care, with the father having scheduled visits.
Over time, several visits didn’t happen. The father claimed the mother kept the kids from him, while the mother claimed there were issues like late arrivals and concerns about the father’s behavior, including repeated allegations of insobriety presenting at parenting transitions.
The mother further alleged that one of the children complained that the father physically assaulted him and that the children subsequently began to resist attending parenting visits. The allegation of assault was investigated by the police and no criminal charges were filed. The report to the children’s aid was also investigated and the case file was closed.
The mother said she encouraged the kids to go, but they resisted.
What did the court find after a parenting order review?
The Court found that some parts of the existing parenting time orders were unclear. For example, who was responsible for arranging phone calls wasn’t specified, and details around drop-offs were vague. There could be no contempt in relation to those orders.
However, the court found that the existing order was clear with respect to the father having 3 weekends out of 4 weekends. There was no compliance with this aspect of the order. The issue was whether the mother failed to deliver up the children for parenting time in accordance with the order.
In contempt proceedings, an intentional disobedience of court order must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. This burden of proof is higher than the typical standard of proof in regular civil or family law proceeding, i.e. proof on a balance of probabilities.
The mother and father filed conflicting affidavits regarding the reason for missed weekend visits.
The father’s evidence was that the mother was willfully refusing to allow the children to attend. His theory was that she was attempting to alienate the children from him. The evidence of the paternal grandmother (through the father) was generally that when she attended the mother’s home to pick up the children, they would come outside to her car but refuse to go with her, or they did not appear at all. The mother’s evidence that she actively prepares and encourages the children to attend for parenting time with the father, was uncontroverted.
The Court held that it was not able to find beyond a reasonable doubt that the mother had intentionally failed to produce the children for the father’s parenting time. For occasions, where it was alleged that the children did not come out of the house or advise the grandmother that they would not be going with her, the father’s affidavit was found to be insufficient on evidence on those disputed facts. The court found that the grandmother’s direct evidence in her own affidavit (not hearsay in father’s affidavit) was required especially in contempt proceedings.
Essentially, there wasn’t enough proof that the mother intentionally blocked visits. She even offered makeup time after missing one visit due to a real emergency.
In family law contempt proceedings, the paramount consideration remains the children’s best interest. As a finding of contempt comes with a risk of jail time for parents, the Court highlighted the importance of considering alternative enforcement mechanisms in high-conflict family disputes including any less severe enforcement options, that may be available, e.g. declaration of breach. The alternatives could be engaged in a staged approach, which may give the parties pause to reflect on their conduct and work on cooperative solutions in the best interests of their children.
It was held that when, however, the court considers that a contempt order is truly a last resort and would not work an injustice, it may still decide in its discretion to make a formal order of contempt.
The Ontario Family Law Rules provide specific alternatives to a contempt proceeding for failure to obey an order. The disobedience of an order under these special provisions can be proven on a balance of probability (not requiring proof beyond reasonable doubt). The consequences for being found in disobedience under the family law rules include;
an order to pay an amount to a party or into court as a penalty or fine;
an order striking out the disobeying party’s claims in court;
an order that the disobeying party is not entitled to any further order from the court, and;
an order postponing the trial or any other step in the case.
How a Family Law Lawyer Can Help You Navigate These Issues
Whether you're trying to enforce parenting time or defend yourself against accusations, working with a skilled child custody lawyer and/or a family law lawyer is essential. Here’s how they can support you:
If You’re Trying to Enforce Parenting Time:
Clarify unclear orders: Your lawyer can ask the court to make the order more specific, so future violations are easier to prove.
Keep solid records: Your lawyer will help you track missed visits, late pickups, and problematic messages to build a strong case.
Suggest practical solutions: Supervised visits or using a neutral third party for exchanges can reduce conflict and encourage compliance.
If You’re Being Accused of Not Following the Order:
Show there was no intent: Your lawyer can prove the missed visits were due to emergencies, child resistance, or misunderstandings, not intentional disobedience.
Demonstrate cooperation: Things like offering makeup visits or sending reminders show you’re not deliberately breaking the rules.
Request changes to the order: If the current arrangement isn’t working, your lawyer can propose updates that reflect your family’s new reality.
Practical Tips for Parents Facing These Issues
If you're dealing with a situation where the other parent isn’t following court orders, or if you’ve been accused of not doing so, here’s what you should consider:
Talk to a lawyer early: Get legal advice before making decisions that could affect your case.
Document everything: Keep a log or use a shared app to record missed visits, late pickups, and difficult communication.
Avoid retaliation: Even if the other parent breaks the rules, don’t stop them from seeing the child or withhold support. That could hurt your standing in court.
Take your child’s feelings seriously: If they’re resisting visits, talk to a counselor or involve a Children’s Lawyer. You should balance validating your child’s views or wishes, with your parental obligation to encourage your child’s relationship with the other parent.
Be open to change: Life evolves. Sometimes adjusting the parenting schedule is better for everyone than continuing a legal battle.
Michael Iyore Law’s Advice on Next Steps
Dealing with a parent who won’t follow court orders is frustrating and emotionally draining. But remember, judges focus on what’s best for the child, not just who’s right or wrong.
If you're facing a dispute over parenting time, contacting a qualified child custody lawyer can help you enforce your rights while protecting your child’s emotional health.
At Michael Iyore Law, we guide parents through these tough situations with experience, clarity, and compassion. Contact us today to learn how we can help your family move forward.
Disclaimer: This article is for general information only and does not replace personalized legal advice. Speak to a licensed family law lawyer for help with your specific situation.
