Insights

Can Ningbo's other party not allow children to be enforced?

Ningbo Author：LuXu WANG

After a divorce, the parent who does not have primary custody often finds themselves in a difficult situation: custody is awarded to the other parent, and every time they try to visit their child, their requests are denied under various pretexts, with the agreed-upon “picking up the child on Saturdays” repeatedly falling through. Direct conclusion: visitation right can be applied to the court for enforcement, but the special logic of enforcement must be understood-the object of court enforcement is "uncooperative guardians", not the children themselves; The law clearly cannot enforce the children's personal and visiting behaviors. What the court can do is to take measures such as admonition, fine, detention and inclusion in the dishonest list to urge the party who refuses to assist to fulfill its obligation of assistance. Only by understanding this can one set reasonable expectations for rights protection and employ the appropriate enforcement procedures. This article thoroughly explains the legal basis for enforcement, the specific measures, the evidentiary requirements, and the boundary conditions.

1. Legal basis for enforcement: the three-tiered structure of rights and obligations

The structure of rights and obligations for the enforcement of visitation rights is established by Article 1086 of the Civil Code: the first paragraph stipulates that the father or mother who does not directly raise their children after divorce has the right to visit their children, and the other party has the obligation to assist them, the people's court shall suspend the visit according to law, and the visit shall be resumed after the reason for the suspension disappears.

There are mainly two rules at the implementation level:

  1. Rules of Compulsory Measures: Article 68 of the Interpretation (I) of the Supreme People's Court on the Application of the Marriage and Family Code of the the People's Republic of China Civil Code stipulates that for the relevant individuals or organizations who refuse to assist the other party to exercise the visitation right, the people's court can take compulsory measures such as detention and fines according to law, but cannot enforce the children's personal and visitation behavior -- this is the "master switch" of the enforcement of visitation right of visitation, which grants coercive force, it also draws an insurmountable red line.
  2. Rules of Suspension and Resumption: Article 66 of Interpretation 1 stipulates that if one of the parties requests to suspend the visit in the process of performing the effective judgment, ruling or mediation statement, the people's court shall make a ruling according to law if it considers it necessary to suspend the visit after consulting the opinions of both parties; after the suspension of the visit disappears, the party shall be notified in writing to resume the visit according to the request of the party. Article 67 explicitly provides that minor children, the parent who has direct custody of the child, and other legal guardians who bear the obligations to support, educate, and protect the minor child, are entitled to request the suspension of visitation rights.

In terms of the requirements, an application for compulsory enforcement of visitation rights must satisfy the following conditions: there exists a legally effective document (judgment, mediation agreement, or duly confirmed agreement) specifying the manner and timing of visitation; the party subject to enforcement (the custodial parent) refuses, without justifiable reason, to fulfill its obligation to cooperate; and the applicant files the enforcement application within the statutory period (within two years after the enforcement basis takes effect).

2. The system of enforcement measures: from urging compliance to imposing sanctions.

In handling cases of refusal to cooperate with visitation, the court follows the principle of “education first, punishment second, and gradual escalation”:

  1. Notice of Enforcement and Interview: After a case is filed, a notice of enforcement shall be issued to the person subject to enforcement, ordering them to fulfill their obligation to assist within a specified time limit; legal consequences may also be explained through telephone communication or in-person interviews.
  2. Counseling and Written Pledge of Repentance: For a first instance of refusal to cooperate, the court may issue a warning and require the party to submit a written pledge of repentance, while also arranging one supervised visitation exchange.
  3. Fines and detention: If, after being educated, the party still refuses to cooperate and the circumstances are serious, fines or detention may be imposed in accordance with Article 68 of Interpretation I;
  4. Credit-based Sanctions: Inclusion on the List of Discredited Persons Subject to Enforcement and imposition of restrictions on high‑value consumption; notification to the individual’s employer or community—although such sanctions for failure to comply with visitation orders are less common than those applied in property enforcement, they nonetheless have a legitimate basis for application and exert a significant deterrent effect, particularly on public officials and similar groups.
  5. Assisted Enforcement: The court shall designate the time and place for visitation handovers (e.g., at the school entrance or in a community activity room), and, when necessary, arrange for enforcement officers, family affairs investigators, and Women’s Federation staff to be present as witnesses, thereby transforming adversarial handovers into procedural ones.
  6. Criminal Boundary of Refusal to Execute: Those who have the ability to fulfill the obligation of assistance but refuse to perform, and if the circumstances are serious, may touch the crime of refusing to execute the judgment and ruling in Article 313 of the Criminal Law-in practice, very few people are punished due to visiting problems, but the extreme situation of continuous confrontation and repeated punishment still not repenting does not rule out this path.

The reality that needs to be explained to the visiting party is: the deterrent object of the implementation measures is the assisting obligor. If the child is young or is influenced by the other party and is determined not to meet, the court will not and cannot force the child-at this time, the forced "implementation" will hurt the child. The rational approach is to turn to the long-term efforts to restore the parent-child relationship or consider changing the parenting relationship.

Materials for the enforcement application and case filing

To apply for compulsory enforcement of visitation rights, you typically need to submit: a petition for compulsory enforcement (clearly stating the case number serving as the basis for enforcement and the specific request—details of the proposed visitation arrangements); the final judgment or mediation agreement; the respondent’s identity information; and evidence demonstrating the other party’s refusal to cooperate. After the case is filed for enforcement, the court shall issue an enforcement notice to the party subject to enforcement and order it to perform within a specified time limit. Any temporary adjustments to visitation arrangements (such as during holidays or school vacations) may be requested to be clarified at the same time. The period for applying for enforcement is two years, commencing from the date each visitation period specified in the judgment expires. Do not allow your rights to lapse simply because you are “too lazy to go to court again.” It should be clarified that the legal documents eligible for enforcement are not limited to judgments—divorce mediation agreements issued by the court also have compulsory enforceability. However, a divorce agreement reached through administrative registration, if not judicially confirmed, cannot be directly enforced; the rights and obligations must first be confirmed through litigation before they can be asserted.

Flexible Measures in Implementation and New Approaches to Visitation

In addition to punitive measures, the court is also exploring restorative enforcement methods: designate neutral handover locations (school gates, community activity rooms, court family mediation rooms), and arrange family investigators and women's federations to be present to witness; for those living in different places or long-term confrontations, video calls and other ways can be negotiated to supplement visits to ensure continuous parent-child contact-some courts in Ningbo have already used online visiting arrangements in family cases. The more specific and aligned with the child’s daily routine the implementation plan is, the smoother its execution will be; a vague arrangement like “visitation once a week” often becomes a breeding ground for disputes. For those who have been punished for many times and still refuse to assist and whose circumstances are serious, in addition to detention fines and punishment for dishonesty, in theory they can also be investigated for criminal responsibility along the path of refusing to execute judgments and convictions (Article 313 of the Criminal Law). However, in practice, the court is extremely cautious about this and is usually limited to civil coercive measures. If obstruction has substantially deprived the possibility of visitation, changing custody is a more realistic direction than criminal prosecution.

3. Suspension of visitation: the other party's "shield" and your "red line"

A common excuse used by the custodial parent to obstruct visitation is, “Visitation is not good for the child.” This argument is not entirely without merit—Article 1,086, paragraph 3, of the Civil Code does indeed provide that visitation shall be suspended if it is detrimental to the child’s physical or mental health. The statutory grounds for suspending visitation typically include: the visiting parent’s alcoholism, drug abuse, violent tendencies, contagious diseases, or engaging in conduct during visitation that incites or induces the child to harbor resentment toward the custodial parent. Therefore:

  1. If the custodial parent has sufficient evidence to prove that the visiting parent has engaged in the aforementioned conduct, they may, in accordance with the law, request that visitation be temporarily suspended—procedurally, pursuant to Article 66 of Interpretation I, such suspension shall be ordered by the court; the custodial parent may not unilaterally “withhold” the child and refuse to effect the handover.
  2. The visiting parent should avoid giving the other party any grounds for complaint: remain restrained during visits, refrain from instilling negative attitudes in the child, and do not use visitation as an opportunity to confront or conflict with the other parent; otherwise, what begins as a claim of “rights infringement” may escalate into a suspension of visitation rights.
  3. Once the grounds for suspension have ceased to exist, the visiting parent has the right to request that visitation be resumed, and the court shall issue a written notice to reinstate it—suspension does not constitute a permanent deprivation of visitation rights.

4. Evidence preservation: the common basis for the enforcement application and the change of custody

Whether it involves applying for enforcement or subsequently seeking a modification of child custody, evidence is fundamental. It is recommended to standardize five categories of materials:

If the other party applies to suspend visitation, the court must, after consulting both parties, determine whether there are indeed facts demonstrating that the visitation is “detrimental to the child’s physical and mental health”; it may not suspend visitation solely on the basis of the statement that “the child does not wish to see the other parent.” Upon receipt of an application or ruling for suspension, you may submit evidence demonstrating a satisfactory record of visitation and the absence of violence, alcohol abuse, or similar issues. If necessary, you may also request the court to ascertain the children’s wishes and obtain a family‑situation investigation report. Once the circumstances giving rise to the suspension have ceased, you may, pursuant to Article 66 of Interpretation I, apply to the court for a written notice to resume visitation. Resuming visitation should be done gradually, starting with short, supervised meetings to progressively rebuild the parent–child bond.

  1. Record each instance of being obstructed in sequence: time, location, the other party’s reason, and details of the communication.
  2. Chat logs and call recordings: direct evidence of the other party’s refusal, delays, or rescheduling;
  3. Alarm Log: An alarm is triggered when a handover refusal occurs, and the dispatch records serve as the most compelling official evidence.
  4. Witness testimony: Relatives and friends who accompanied the individual, staff members of the residents’ committee, or school personnel;
  5. Record of Request for Additional Investigation: Correspondence showing that a proactive proposal for additional investigation was rejected, thereby proving that the fault lies with the other party.

When applying for enforcement, you should submit together the enforceable document, the identity information of the party to be enforced against, and the aforementioned evidence; after the case is filed for enforcement, proactively cooperate with the court in determining the handover plan, and formalize “every Saturday at what time and where the handover will take place” as part of the enforcement plan.

Follow-up After Filing for Enforcement

After the execution of the case is filed, it is not "finished after handing in the materials": take the initiative to submit the new evidence of the other party's refusal to cooperate, the arrangement of children's work and rest and transportation to the executive judge, and assist in determining the handover plan; if the other party still fails to perform after being ordered, it shall apply in writing for taking measures such as fine, detention and inclusion in the dishonest list and explain the circumstances; every time after completing a visit, keep the handover record for the next dispute. It is important to manage expectations regarding the difficulty of enforcement: In cases involving visitation rights, there are no assets available for seizure, which limits the court’s options. Ultimately, the most effective solutions remain restoring mutual trust or modifying the custody arrangement. Treating enforcement as a means to facilitate negotiation rather than an end in itself often yields better results.

5. Common misconceptions

Myth 1: The court will forcibly bring the child to the parents.Correct answer: The law explicitly prohibits the compulsory enforcement of a child’s personal rights or visitation arrangements; the court may only impose penalties and issue directives to compel non-cooperative custodians.

Misconception 2: If the other party refuses to allow me to see the child, I will stop paying child support.Correct answer: The right to visitation and child support are independent of each other and cannot be set off against one another; refusal to pay child support will still be subject to compulsory enforcement, and the proper approach is for both parties to fulfill their respective obligations.

Misconception 3: Grandparents also have a statutory right of visitation and can apply for enforcement.Correct answer: The subjects entitled to statutory visitation rights are the parents; grandparents’ visits with their grandchildren, in principle, are arranged through mutual consultation and based on familial affection, and do not constitute a statutory visitation right that can be enforced by law.

Misconception 4: As long as I want to watch it, I can do so anytime, anywhere.Correct answer: Visitation shall be conducted in accordance with the manner and schedule specified in the legally effective document. Making unscheduled visits or staging protests at the school gate may constitute harassment, thereby providing the other party with grounds to suspend visitation and even to report the matter to the police.

Misconception 5: Filing for enforcement once will resolve the matter permanently.Correct answer: Enforcement of visitation rights is often repetitive; each time it is obstructed, a new enforcement application may be required. To reduce such repetition, the visitation schedule should be clearly specified, and fixed handover procedures should be established.

Misconception 6: If visitation is being obstructed, you can call the police to have them bring the child over.Correct answer: Public security organs generally do not directly enforce visitation disputes, but calling the police can document the conflict and the refusal to hand over the child; the police report serves as crucial evidence for subsequent enforcement proceedings and any modifications to the custody arrangement.

Misconception 7: Visits can only take place on weekends.Correct answer: The manner and timing of visitation shall be determined by agreement or court order. Visitation during winter and summer vacations, public holidays, and video visits may all be stipulated; the more such arrangements align with the child’s schedule and practical circumstances, the easier they will be to implement.

6. Frequently Asked Questions

How do I apply for the compulsory enforcement of visitation rights?

Based on an effective judgment or mediation statement specifying the visitation schedule, submit an application for enforcement, together with evidence of the other party’s refusal to cooperate, to the primary‑instance court that issued the document. The court shall order the other party to fulfill its obligation to assist; if it refuses to do so, measures such as imposing fines or detention may be taken.

The other party has hidden the child. Can the court forcibly take the child away?

You cannot forcibly take the child away. You may apply to the court to order the other party to produce the child or assist in locating the child’s whereabouts; if necessary, you may seek assistance from the public security authorities in the search. In cases of prolonged concealment and refusal to comply, you may consider pursuing a change in custody arrangements.

The judgment only states “entitled to visitation” without specifying the schedule—can it still be enforced?

Cannot be executed directly. First, file a lawsuit to clarify the manner, timing, and location of visitation; after obtaining a new, legally effective court document, then apply for enforcement.

The other party has applied to suspend visitation while the case is ongoing. What should I do?

Termination must be ordered by the court and requires evidence that it would be detrimental to the child’s physical or mental well‑being. You may submit rebuttal evidence in support of your application (e.g., evidence showing no history of violence or alcohol abuse, and a satisfactory record of visitation), and request the court to solicit the children’s wishes and obtain a family investigation report.

If the other party consistently refuses to cooperate, what else can be done besides enforcement?

According to Interpretation I, Article 56, a party may file a lawsuit to modify child custody on the grounds that the current arrangement is demonstrably detrimental to the child’s physical and mental well‑being, thereby escalating a dispute over visitation rights into a dispute over custody; these two matters may be pursued concurrently.

7. Practical insights from a lawyer's experience

When visitation is repeatedly denied, applying for compulsory enforcement is feasible, but one must first understand its specific legal framework: the court’s enforcement targets the non-cooperative custodial parent, not the child themselves; the law does not permit enforcing either the child’s person or the act of visitation itself. What the court can do is to urge the other party to fulfill its obligation of assistance by means such as admonishment, imposition of fines, detention, and inclusion on a list of discredited persons.Understand this, in order to set reasonable expectations, implementation can increase the other party's default costs, but can not guarantee that every visit will be successful, expect enforcement to bring the child out, often end up disappointed.

For enforcement to truly take effect, the prerequisite is to document the other party’s refusal to cooperate as evidence. The appointment to visit the temporarily canceled chat records, many failed calls and time points, the process of being turned away, and relatives and friends who can testify are all useful materials. Organizing these into a chronological record that highlights recurring patterns is far more compelling than making scattered, disjointed claims about the other party’s refusal to allow access. When applying for enforcement, clarifying the specific arrangements for visits and the number of violations by the other party will also make it easier for the court to judge which measure to take and avoid repeated additions because of the general nature of the material.

The other party often advocates to suspend the visit on the grounds that it is not good for the children's physical and mental health, which is not only its shield, but also reminds itself not to overstep the line: not to belittle the other party in front of the children during the visit, not to inquire about privacy or create opposition in the name of visiting, otherwise it may in turn become the reason for the other party to apply for suspension. Instead of spending a long time on visiting and executing, it is better to simultaneously assess whether there are new situations that support changing the dependency relationship and change the situation from the arrangement itself. Putting the child at the center of the arrangement, rather than as a tool for confrontation, is both compliant and more likely to be accepted by the court and the other party.

The core of the enforcement of visitation rights is to urge the other party to fulfill the obligation of assistance, not to "rob the child". The rational path is: first fix the evidence, then apply for execution, supplemented by mediation and guidance, and if necessary, change the support. Execution is not the goal, but the goal is to let the child grow up under the care of both parents-for the visiting party, a stable, punctual and restrained visiting image is itself the best line of defense against the defense of "suspension of visiting"; For the direct dependents, obstructing visiting is both illegal and harmful to the children, and the red line of the law will not disappear because of the words "the children do not want to see.