National People's Congress deputies suggest legislation to regulate cases of seizing children and refusing to visit and protect children's rights, which are increasing year by year for minors. | Pilot | National People's Congress deputies
A divorce war is often accompanied by a long and protracted struggle for children. In recent years, the number of requests for help regarding "snatching, hiding children, and refusing to visit" in marriage and family rights protection complaints received by the Municipal Women's Federation has been increasing year by year, causing serious psychological harm to parents and children. Ma Liejian, a representative of the Municipal People's Congress, suggested promoting local legislation to regulate such behavior. Recently, this suggestion received the latest response. The Municipal High Court stated that for those who repeatedly refuse or obstruct the legitimate exercise of the right to visit underage children by the other party, they will be included in the list of "dishonest executors" in accordance with the law.
It is understood that in 2022, the Municipal Women's Federation commissioned the Municipal Lawyers Association to conduct a special survey and found that at any stage of marriage and family disputes, there may be acts of snatching, hiding underage children, or refusing to visit, with the vast majority lasting for more than six months. The party who loses custody and visitation rights but is hindered will choose multiple channels to protect their rights, including communication and negotiation with the other party, filing a lawsuit with the court, reporting to the police, seeking help from organizations such as the Women's Federation of the Neighborhood Committee, etc. However, most rights protection efforts are ineffective.
Why has snatching children and refusing to visit become a major challenge? In Ma Liejian's view, the main reasons are the lack of legal provisions leading to misconduct in behavior recognition, the lack of effective intervention and relief methods, and cognitive differences in the principle of maximizing the interests of minors. Ma Liejian suggested promoting local legislative research and pilot programs, defining and regulating the behavior of seizing and hiding underage children; To define and establish penalties for acts of robbery, concealment, and refusal of visitation in the judicial practice of this city; Set up temporary visitation mechanisms in the guidelines for handling family related cases and pilot the establishment of temporary visitation platforms with third-party assistance. At the same time, the prohibition of seizing and hiding underage children will be included as a legal basis for personal safety protection orders. She suggested that in judicial practice, it should be clearly stipulated that acts of seizing, hiding, and refusing to visit children are considered as a form of domestic violence, and a personal safety protection order can be applied to the court.
The Municipal High Court stated that whether it is the act of snatching, hiding children, or refusing to be visited by others, it is not conducive to the healthy growth of children, and there are also problems that further exacerbate family conflicts and affect social harmony and stability. To this end, the Municipal High Court has proposed relevant measures to impose sanctions on behaviors such as seizing, hiding children, and refusing rights holders to visit underage children. In custody litigation, one party competes for custody of their child by seizing or hiding their child, and evaluates it as a negative factor when determining the ownership of custody. In the execution of visitation rights cases, if one party repeatedly refuses or obstructs the other party's legitimate exercise of the right to visit underage children, they shall be included in the list of "dishonest persons subject to enforcement" and punished in accordance with the law. If the other party files a lawsuit requesting a change of custody relationship, the refusal to visit should be an important consideration for the change of custody relationship. If one party, through seizing or hiding their children, causes the party with custody to be unable to actually live with the children, and the circumstances are serious and meet the provisions of the crime of refusing to execute court judgments or rulings, their criminal responsibility shall be pursued in accordance with the law.
At present, Shanghai courts have taken the lead in testing the mechanism of family investigation and the system of visiting supervisors in the trial of family related cases. In the custody lawsuit, all courts in the city have introduced social workers to investigate the participation of minors in their lives and studies through the Women's Federation, Youth League Municipal Committee, etc. The relevant investigation reports produced by social workers are important basis for considering which party minors live together with. The visitation supervisor system establishes a third party recognized by both parties as the visitation supervisor, which enables children to have regular contact with the party who does not live together in situations where the conflict between divorced parents is deep, ensuring the emotional maintenance between children and parents. The system of visiting supervisors has been effectively implemented in courts such as Putuo, Jing'an, and Changning, and the city's courts are now fully promoting the implementation of the above system.
