A Petition for Equal Enforcement of Parental Responsibilities and Parenting Time

We call upon federal and state lawmakers to examine the imbalance between the enforcement of child-support orders and the enforcement of court-ordered parenting time.

A parent should support his or her children. Children also benefit from safe, meaningful relationships with their parents. When a court has determined that a father is entitled to parenting time—and there is no substantiated finding that he presents a danger to his children—repeated intentional interference with that court order should receive a meaningful and timely legal response.

THE CURRENT ENFORCEMENT GAP

The United States has an extensive child-support enforcement system. Federal regulations require state Title IV-D programs to monitor compliance with support obligations and take specified enforcement actions when payments become delinquent.

 

Parenting-time enforcement generally operates differently.

 

The Congressional Research Service reports that state family laws have traditionally treated child support and visitation as separate legal issues and that visitation historically has not fallen within the primary responsibility of the federal Child Support Enforcement program.

 

That means a father can face powerful government enforcement mechanisms when he violates a financial-support order while potentially having to initiate a separate court proceeding when the other parent repeatedly violates his parenting-time order.

 

This petition does not propose allowing parents to stop paying child support because parenting time is denied.

But, Can government systems efficiently enforce one part of a family-court order, why shouldn't families have an equally accessible and effective process for enforcing the parenting-time portion of their orders?

 

PARENT-CHILD SEPARATION CAN HAVE SERIOUS CONSEQUENCES

 

Research gives policymakers reason to take unjustified interference with parent-child relationships seriously.

 

A 2016 representative-poll study reported that 13.4% of parents surveyed said they had been alienated from one or more of their children.

 

A later U.S./Canadian study reported substantially higher estimates depending on how alienating behaviors were measured. In one U.S. sample, 39.1% of 594 parents reported being non-reciprocating targets of parental-alienating behaviors. The researchers estimated that 6.7% of parents had children who were moderately to severely alienated and reported high levels of depression and trauma symptoms among affected parents.

 

These estimates should not be treated as an official government count. Measuring parental alienation is difficult, definitions differ among researchers, and an allegation of alienation does not by itself prove that alienation occurred.

 

Nevertheless, broader research concerning parent-child separation also raises concerns. A 2025 umbrella review encompassing 28 meta-analyses, 746,175 participants and 170 outcomes found that parent-child-separated children had elevated risks across several categories of emotional, cognitive and behaviors.

THIS ISSUE CAN AFFECT FATHERS AND MOTHERS

 

This petition focuses particularly on fathers who are complying with support obligations while being denied court-ordered contact, but protecting parenting time should ultimately protect children and both parents.

 

Research has found that visitation sabotage and alienating behaviors can be directed against mothers as well as fathers. One study of 1,212 self-selected participants reported that such behavior affected both sexes, although fathers reported being targeted more frequently in that particular sample.

 

The goal should therefore be equal enforcement—not automatic assumptions that either mothers or fathers are telling the truth simply because of their sex.

 

PROTECT CHILDREN WHILE PROTECTING DUE PROCESS

 

Nothing in this petition should require a child to have contact with a parent when a court determines that the contact would create a genuine safety risk.

 

Allegations involving domestic violence, child abuse, sexual abuse, neglect, stalking or other serious safety concerns must be investigated carefully.

 

At the same time, an allegation alone should not permanently destroy a parent-child relationship without appropriate investigation, evidence and judicial review.

 

Where there is no substantiated abuse or safety finding, intentional and repeated interference with court-ordered parenting time deserves an effective remedy.

 

WHAT WE ASK LAWMAKERS TO CONSIDER

 

We ask Congress and state legislatures to consider reforms that would:

 

1. Create a rapid parenting-time enforcement process. Parents should not have to spend months or years litigating repeated violations of an existing parenting order.

 

2. Provide an accessible enforcement mechanism comparable to child-support enforcement. A parent should be able to report documented violations and obtain timely review.

 

3. Track repeated violations of parenting-time orders. Missed exchanges, denied visits and other violations could be documented through a standardized system while preserving each parent's ability to contest inaccurate allegations.

 

4. Establish escalating consequences for willful violations. After due process, courts could consider make-up parenting time, counseling, parenting coordination, attorney fees, civil contempt or other remedies permitted under state law.

 

5. Provide meaningful civil remedies for severe, intentional interference. Legislatures should examine whether existing contempt, custody-modification and tort remedies adequately address deliberate conduct intended to destroy a lawful parent-child relationship.

 

6. Protect legitimate abuse victims. No parent should be punished for seeking emergency protection in good faith or presenting credible evidence that contact poses a danger to a child.

 

7. Require evidence before severe sanctions are imposed. Neither an accusation of abuse nor an accusation of parental alienation should automatically determine a case. Courts should evaluate evidence and the child's safety and best interests.

 

8. Improve access to mediation and parenting coordinators. Some disputes can be resolved before they become years-long family-court battles.

 

9. Collect national data. Policymakers need reliable statistics on denied parenting time, enforcement petitions, substantiated abuse, intentionally false allegations, contempt findings, custody modifications and outcomes for children.

 

A FATHER SHOULD NOT BE REDUCED TO A PAYCHECK

 

Financial support is an important parental responsibility.

 

But fatherhood is more than money.

 

It is birthdays, school events, homework, doctor visits, conversations, discipline, encouragement, holidays, ordinary weekends and simply being present while a child grows up.

 

When a father has no substantiated history of abuse or dangerous conduct, has a valid parenting-time order, and wants to remain actively involved in his child's life, repeated intentional interference with that relationship should not be treated as insignificant.

 

Likewise, mothers deserve the same protection when they are the parent being wrongfully excluded.

 

OUR REQUEST

 

We ask policymakers to examine a system in which financial-support orders can receive extensive administrative enforcement while parents may need to return repeatedly to court to enforce parenting-time orders.

 

We support continued enforcement of child support.

 

We also ask for effective enforcement of court-ordered parenting time, strong due-process protections, safeguards for genuine abuse victims, and meaningful remedies when a parent is proven to have deliberately and repeatedly interfered with the other parent's lawful relationship with their child.

 

Children deserve financial support.

 

Children deserve safety.

 

And, whenever it is safe and consistent with their best interests, children deserve the opportunity to have meaningful relationships with both parents.

 

Equal responsibility deserves meaningful and fair enforcement.