Can a Child Refuse to See a Parent in Ontario?
CC Family Law
September 9, 2026
September 9, 2026
One of the most difficult situations after separation occurs when a child begins refusing to spend time with one parent. A child who previously followed the parenting schedule may suddenly resist going. A teenager may announce that they are simply not going anymore. In other cases, a child may have been reluctant about parenting time from the beginning.
This leaves both parents in a difficult position. The parent expecting the child may believe the other parent is interfering with their relationship. The parent caring for the child may feel caught between complying with a parenting arrangement and responding to a child who is genuinely distressed.
The legal answer is more nuanced than many families expect. Ontario law does not establish an age at which children simply take control of the parenting schedule. Instead, a child's views and preferences form part of the broader assessment of what is in that particular child's best interests. Ontario's Children's Law Reform Act specifically requires courts to consider a child's views and preferences, giving them due weight according to the child's age and maturity.
Understanding what that means in practice can help parents respond appropriately when a child says they no longer want to see the other parent.
No. There is no specific age in Ontario at which a child automatically gains the right to decide whether they will see a parent.
Parents sometimes hear that children can choose at age 12, 14 or 16. Canadian family law does not establish such a rule. Justice Canada specifically explains that there is no particular age, such as 12 or 14, when children get to decide their parenting arrangements.
Instead, courts consider the individual child.
A seven-year-old saying they do not want to leave one parent's home may be treated differently from a mature 16-year-old who has consistently expressed a reasoned preference about their parenting schedule. Age matters, but maturity, circumstances and the reasons behind the child's views matter as well.
As children become older and more mature, their wishes will generally carry greater practical and legal significance. That still does not mean a particular birthday suddenly gives the child complete authority over an existing parenting arrangement.
A child's views and preferences are expressly included among the factors Ontario courts consider when determining the child's best interests.
Under Ontario's Children's Law Reform Act and the federal Divorce Act, the court considers the child's views and preferences and gives them due weight according to the child's age and maturity, unless those views cannot be ascertained. The court must also consider factors including the child's developmental needs, relationships with parents and other important people, history of care, stability, each parent's ability to meet the child's needs, and family violence.
The federal Divorce Act follows a similar best-interests approach. Justice Canada explains that older children's views and preferences will usually receive more weight, while emphasizing that every child develops differently.
That means a court does not simply ask:
"What does the child want?"
The broader question is:
"What parenting arrangement is in this child's best interests, considering the child's views along with all of the other relevant circumstances?"
That distinction is critical.
When a child refuses parenting time, understanding why is often more important than the refusal itself.
Children may resist seeing a parent for many reasons. Sometimes the explanation is relatively ordinary. A teenager may want to spend weekends with friends, participate in sports or work at a part-time job. Moving between two homes may become frustrating as schoolwork and extracurricular commitments increase.
Other situations may involve strained communication or conflict between the child and parent. A child may resent rules at one household, dislike a parent's new partner or remain angry about events surrounding the separation.
There can also be other more serious explanations. A child may be frightened because of family violence, inappropriate behaviour, substance use or another safety concern. The child's reluctance may also be influenced by ongoing conflict between the parents.
These situations should not automatically be treated as equivalent. A teenager wanting to attend a friend's birthday party instead of parenting time raises very different considerations from a child expressing fear about entering a parent's home.
Identifying the reason for the refusal is therefore an important first step.
Ontario family courts do not decide parenting disputes based solely on what is fairest to either parent. The governing consideration is the child's best interests.
The Divorce Act and the Children's Law Reform Act requires the court to give primary consideration to the child's physical, emotional and psychological safety, security and well-being.
Other considerations include the child's age and developmental needs, the strength of the child's relationship with each parent, the child's history of care, stability, plans for the child's care, each parent's ability to meet the child's needs and the child's own views and preferences.
The law also considers each parent's willingness to support the development and maintenance of the child's relationship with the other parent.
That last point can become particularly important when a child begins refusing parenting time.
A parent should take a child's genuine concerns seriously. At the same time, parents generally need to avoid conduct that unnecessarily undermines the child's relationship with the other parent.
Caspersz Chegini LLP's Children & Parenting practice addresses parenting schedules, decision-making responsibility, relocation and other disputes involving children.
An existing parenting order does not simply disappear because a child announces that they no longer want to follow it.
Parenting orders establish legally enforceable arrangements. Ontario's Children's Law Reform Act expressly addresses enforcement of parenting and contact orders.
This creates an important distinction between listening to a child's concerns and unilaterally deciding that an existing court order no longer applies.
If a child repeatedly refuses to attend scheduled parenting time, the circumstances should be examined carefully. Depending on the situation, parents may be able to resolve the problem through communication, negotiation or changes to practical aspects of the schedule.
If the problem is persistent and the existing arrangement is no longer workable, legal advice may be necessary to determine whether the parenting arrangement should formally change.
This connects directly with the Motion to Change process discussed in our previous article. An existing family court order generally requires a material change in circumstances before the court will consider varying it. A child's changing needs, age and circumstances can sometimes be relevant to that assessment.
Parenting disputes involving teenagers can be particularly complicated.
Legally, there is still no magic age when the court hands complete control of the parenting schedule to the child. Practically, however, the views of a mature teenager can become increasingly significant.
A parenting schedule that was workable for an eight-year-old may become difficult when that child is 15 or 16. School, employment, sports, friendships, relationships and growing independence can all affect how parenting arrangements function.
Justice Canada's guidance recognizes this practical reality by explaining that children's views generally receive greater weight as they become older and more mature.
A court may therefore take a mature teenager's consistently expressed wishes very seriously. That does not mean a parent should tell the teenager that court orders are optional. It means that an arrangement that repeatedly conflicts with an older child's genuine and well-considered preferences may need to be reviewed rather than simply enforced in exactly the same manner indefinitely.
This question is difficult because "force" can mean very different things.
Parents are generally expected to support parenting arrangements and encourage children to maintain relationships with both parents when doing so is consistent with the child's best interests. The Divorce Act reflects the principle that children should have as much time with each parent as is consistent with those best interests. This is not a presumption of equal parenting time.
But physically forcing a highly distressed child into a vehicle is obviously a very different matter from telling a reluctant child that they are expected to follow the parenting schedule.
The appropriate response depends heavily on the child's age, maturity, reasons for refusing, level of distress and any safety concerns.
Parents facing repeated refusals should be cautious about choosing either extreme: simply abandoning the parenting arrangement or attempting increasingly aggressive methods of enforcing it. Both approaches can create additional problems.
Safety concerns change the analysis considerably.
Both Ontario legislation and the federal Divorce Act make the child's physical, emotional and psychological safety, security and well-being a primary consideration in parenting decisions. Family violence is also an explicit factor in the best-interests analysis.
If a child reports abuse, violence or another credible safety concern, those statements should not be dismissed as ordinary resistance to parenting time.
The appropriate response will depend on the circumstances and seriousness of the concern. In some situations, immediate legal advice or other protective steps may be necessary.
At the same time, allegations arising during a parenting dispute can have serious consequences for everyone involved. Parents should avoid conducting aggressive interrogations of the child or placing the child in the position of having to build a case against the other parent.
The objective should be to understand and address the child's safety and well-being without unnecessarily drawing the child deeper into the parents' dispute.
Sometimes a parent believes the child is refusing visits because the other parent is encouraging the refusal.
That can happen, but it should not automatically be assumed.
Ontario's best-interests factors include each parent's willingness to support the child's relationship with the other parent. A parent's conduct may therefore become relevant if they are deliberately interfering with the child's relationship with the other parent or failing to support an existing parenting arrangement.
However, children can also develop their own concerns and preferences.
A child's refusal may result from conflict with the parent, the child's developmental stage, problems within the parent-child relationship, practical difficulties with the schedule, safety concerns or a combination of factors.
Determining what is actually happening may require more than simply accepting either parent's explanation.
Children should generally not be placed in the middle of their parents' dispute or asked to choose sides.
There are processes within family law for children's views to be communicated without requiring a parent to repeatedly question the child about where they want to live or whom they want to see.
The appropriate method depends on the case. Justice Canada notes that in high-conflict situations, a child may need assistance from a professional such as a social worker to communicate their views.
The important principle is that hearing from a child is not the same as making the child responsible for the decision.
Children can have a voice without carrying the burden of deciding the outcome of their parents' dispute.
Not every parenting-time problem needs to result in litigation.
Parents may sometimes agree that an existing schedule no longer works and negotiate a new arrangement that better reflects the child's age, activities, school schedule and current needs.
A parenting agreement can provide structure around regular parenting time, holidays, vacations, transportation, communication and other practical issues. Caspersz Chegini LLP assists parents with parenting agreements and parenting schedules, including situations where existing arrangements need to be reconsidered.
Where parents cannot agree, mediation or negotiation may provide an alternative to a contested hearing. Caspersz Chegini LLP also provides family law litigation services when disputes cannot be resolved outside court.
If an existing court order is involved, parents should obtain legal advice about whether an informal change is sufficient or whether the revised arrangement should be formally documented.
The first priority is understanding what is causing the refusal.
Listen carefully without turning the conversation into an interrogation. Try to determine whether the concern involves ordinary resistance, scheduling issues, conflict within the parent-child relationship or something more serious.
Avoid criticizing the other parent in front of the child or asking the child to choose between parents. Keep records of significant incidents, communications and efforts to address the problem, particularly if refusals become persistent.
If an existing parenting order is no longer working, do not assume that the child's refusal automatically changes the order. Obtaining legal advice can help determine whether negotiation, mediation, a revised parenting agreement or a court application is appropriate.
Most importantly, respond proportionately. The solution to a teenager resisting alternate weekends because of work and social commitments may look very different from the response required when a younger child expresses genuine fear.
A child refusing to see a parent can quickly become a significant family law dispute.
One parent may believe the child is making an independent decision. The other may believe the refusal is being encouraged. Both may genuinely believe they are acting in the child's best interests.
A family lawyer can help separate the emotional conflict from the legal issues.
This may involve reviewing the existing parenting agreement or court order, assessing the child's circumstances, determining how the child's views may be considered, negotiating changes to the parenting schedule and advising whether court intervention is appropriate.
Where the dispute cannot be resolved, a lawyer can also help present evidence concerning the child's needs, relationships, preferences and best interests to the court.
Caspersz Chegini LLP focuses exclusively on family law and advises clients on decision-making responsibility, parenting schedules, relocation, support, separation and family law litigation.
There is no predetermined age when an Ontario child automatically gains the legal right to decide whether they will see a parent.
Instead, the child's views and preferences are one part of the best-interests analysis. As children become older and more mature, their views will generally carry greater weight. But age alone does not determine the outcome.
The reason behind the child's refusal matters enormously. So do the child's maturity, relationship with each parent, developmental needs, safety and the history of the parenting arrangement.
For parents, the goal should not be to make the child "pick" a parent. It should be to understand what is happening and determine what parenting arrangement now serves the child's best interests.
If your child is refusing to spend time with the other parent or your parenting time is being disrupted because your child is refusing to attend, getting legal advice early can help prevent the situation from becoming more difficult.
At Caspersz Chegini LLP, we advise parents throughout Ontario on children and parenting matters, including parenting schedules, decision-making responsibility, relocation and disputes involving existing parenting arrangements.
We can review your current agreement or court order, assess the circumstances behind the child's refusal and explain whether negotiation, mediation or court proceedings may be appropriate.
Contact Caspersz Chegini LLP to schedule a consultation and discuss your parenting matter.
There is no specific age when a child automatically gets to decide whether to see a parent in Ontario. A child's views and preferences are considered according to the child's age and maturity, but the ultimate decision must be based on the child's best interests.
No automatic rule gives a 12-year-old the right to choose which parent to live with. The child's views may be considered and given weight based on age and maturity, along with the other factors relevant to the child's best interests.
There is no automatic legal age at which a child controls the parenting schedule. However, the views of an older, mature teenager will generally receive more weight than those of a much younger child. The teenager's reasons and overall best interests remain important.
A child's refusal does not automatically cancel or change an existing parenting order. Parents should try to understand why the child is refusing and obtain legal advice if the problem persists. Depending on the circumstances, the issue may be addressed through negotiation, mediation or an application to change the existing arrangement.
Ontario and federal law requires courts to consider a child's views and preferences as part of the best-interests analysis, giving those views appropriate weight based on the child's age and maturity, unless the views cannot be ascertained. The child's preference is important, but it is not necessarily determinative.
Concerns involving family violence, abuse or a child's safety should be taken seriously. A child's physical, emotional and psychological safety, security and well-being are primary considerations in parenting decisions. Legal advice should be obtained promptly when a child's refusal involves credible safety concerns.
