“I don’t want to go.”
For a parent, hearing those words can be confronting. Is the child frightened? Are they struggling with separation? Are they caught between their parents? Or are they being influenced by the other parent?
There is rarely a simple answer.
When a child resists or refuses spending time with a parent, the important question is why. A child's reluctance may reflect family violence or trauma, problems in the parent-child relationship, developmental or emotional difficulties, loyalty conflicts, parental influence, or a combination of factors.
The refusal itself is a starting point for understanding what is happening. It is not proof of any particular explanation.
Start with the child, not the label
Under the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), a child's best interests are the paramount consideration when a court makes parenting orders. The court considers matters including the child's safety, their views, their developmental, psychological and emotional needs, the capacity of their carers to meet those needs, and the benefit of relationships with parents and other significant people where it is safe. (Section 60CA, Section 60CC, Family Law Act 1975 Cth)
That means the issue is not simply how to make a child attend the next visit. The more important question is: what is causing the resistance, and what arrangements will best support this particular child's safety and wellbeing?
What might be behind a child's refusal?
Family violence, fear and trauma
Some children resist spending time with a parent because of frightening or harmful experiences.
Family violence is much broader than physical violence. In assessing a child's best interests, the court must consider arrangements that promote safety from family violence, abuse, neglect and other harm. It must also consider any history of family violence, abuse or neglect involving the child or their carer, together with relevant family violence orders. (Section 4AB Family Law Act 1975 Cth)
In these circumstances, a child's reluctance may be a response to something they have experienced rather than evidence that somebody else has manipulated them.
The child's individual needs
Children can also struggle with parenting arrangements for reasons that do not fit neatly into either “family violence” or “alienation”.
Their age, personality and emotional and developmental needs may all be relevant. Transitions between households may be difficult. Overnight stays may cause anxiety. A child may have concerns about aspects of a parent's care or simply need greater stability and predictability.
The current legislation expressly requires courts to consider a child's developmental, psychological, emotional and cultural needs.
Being caught between parents
Children can also find themselves caught in adult conflict.
A child may worry that enjoying time with one parent will hurt the other parent or feel that they need to choose sides. That pressure does not necessarily come from somebody explicitly telling the child to refuse contact. Children can be highly sensitive to what is said and done around them.
Parental influence
There are also cases in which a parent's behaviour contributes to the deterioration of the child's relationship with the other parent.
Repeated criticism of the other parent, placing emotional pressure on a child or unjustifiably interfering with their relationship can be important evidence.
But the focus needs to remain on the actual behaviour and its effect on the child, rather than simply applying a label.
It is equally important to distinguish unjustified interference from protective parenting. A parent raising genuine concerns about violence or harm should not automatically be characterised as “alienating” the child.
Does refusal mean “parental alienation”?
No.
A child's refusal to see a parent does not, by itself, establish that the other parent caused the refusal.
Nor does the explanation necessarily have to be one or the other. A child may have legitimate difficulties in their relationship with one parent while also being exposed to negative messages or behaviour from the other. Several factors may be operating at the same time.
This is why labels can be unhelpful if they are applied too quickly. They risk assuming the answer before the evidence has been properly examined.
A better approach is to ask what has actually happened, what the child has experienced and which explanation, or combination of explanations, best fits the evidence.
How can the court work out what is happening?
A careful assessment may ask:
What is the child actually worried about?
When did the resistance begin?
What was happening in the family at that time?
What was the child's relationship with each parent previously like?
Is there evidence of family violence, intimidation, abuse, neglect or other harmful parenting?
Is there evidence of behaviour by one parent that may be influencing the child's relationship with the other?
What are the child's particular emotional and developmental needs?
Which explanation best fits the evidence as a whole?
Importantly, listening to a child does not mean asking the child to decide the case.
The Family Law Act provides ways for a court to obtain information about a child's views, including through a family report or an Independent Children's Lawyer. A child cannot be required to express a view. (Section 60CD Family Law Act 1975 Cth)
The response should fit the reason
Understanding why a child is refusing contact matters because different causes require different responses.
Where there are family violence or safety concerns, protecting the child and other family members must be central.
In other cases, the appropriate response might involve changes to the parenting arrangements, support for the child's emotional needs, work with one or both parents, or carefully rebuilding a strained parent-child relationship.
There is no single solution that will be appropriate for every family.
Look beyond the label
When a child says, “I don't want to go,” the answer should not automatically be to force contact or to blame the other parent.
The starting point should be curiosity rather than conclusion: What has happened? Why does this child feel this way? And what does this particular child need now?
Ultimately, family law is not about deciding which parent wins an argument over a label. It is about finding arrangements that allow the child to be safe, heard and supported, including in their relationships where those relationships can safely be maintained. If your child is refusing to spend time with a parent, an early conversation can help work out why before positions harden.
This article provides general information only and is not legal advice about your individual circumstances.