When your child lives abroad and meetings become rare, uncertain or impossible, distance is not the only issue. There may be a visitation schedule that the other parent fails to respect, an Italian decision to enforce in another country, or a relocation that has changed the place where family relationships must be regulated. The relationship with your child does not lose importance because the parents live in different States, but the authorities and tools that can make it concrete do change.
I want to clarify a distinction with you that guides the entire process: an obstacle to visitation rights does not always coincide with international child abduction. We will see when the intervention of the Central Authority can be useful, when an already enforceable decision matters, and why, in long-distance relationships, a precise contact program can be more protective than a generic request to see the child.
Relocation Abroad Does Not Erase the Child's Right to a Relationship with Both Parents
The civil code recognizes the child's right to maintain a balanced and continuous relationship with each parent, even after separation or the end of cohabitation. This principle remains relevant even if one of the parents lives in another country: distance requires adapting the methods of meetings, not treating the relationship as a secondary aspect.
Visitation rights may include meetings in the country where the minor lives, periods spent with the other parent during holidays, phone calls and video calls. Under the Hague Convention of 25 October 1980, visitation rights also include the possibility of temporarily taking the child to a place other than their habitual residence. The Convention aims to promote the effective respect of visitation rights between contracting States and was made executive in Italy by Law No. 64 of January 15, 1994.
The decisive factor is the child's habitual residence, meaning the place where their daily life stably takes place. It is not enough to look at citizenship, the registered address, or the country where the parent requesting contact resides. School, medical care, relationships, language, continuity of stay and the concrete organization of family life help determine which State has the closest connection to the child's situation.
This verification serves above all to distinguish two different questions. One concerns how to make meetings effective with a child who lawfully lives abroad. The other concerns the lawfulness of a relocation or a failure to return that has deprived a parent of the power to participate in the decision regarding the child's place of residence.
Hindering Visits and Retaining the Minor Are Different Situations
The failure to respect a meeting is not automatically an international abduction. If your child lives abroad based on a shared agreement or a court order, but the other parent cancels visits, does not respond to proposals, or prevents video calls, the main problem is the organization or implementation of contacts. In this situation, the request must aim to restore a practicable relationship, not necessarily the return of the minor to Italy.
The situation changes if the child is transferred abroad without the necessary consent or is not brought back after a temporary stay. Under the Hague Convention, custody rights also include the power to determine the child's place of residence. If the transfer or retention violates that power, a procedure aimed at the return of the minor to the State of their previous habitual residence may come into play.
The Italian Ministry of Justice page on the 1980 Hague Convention clarifies that the Convention applies to minors who had their habitual residence in a contracting State immediately before the breach of custody or visitation rights, and that its application ceases upon reaching the age of sixteen. It is therefore not enough for the minor to be materially located abroad: it is necessary to verify the country of habitual residence, the content of existing decisions, and the rights concretely exercised before the transfer or failure to return.
Confusing these two levels can make it more difficult to find suitable protection. An application for return does not serve to resolve every dispute regarding the visitation schedule. Conversely, limiting discussions to individual appointments may be insufficient if the real problem is a relocation that has affected the right to decide where the child should live.
When the Italian Central Authority Can Intervene
Cooperation between Central Authorities can be requested to organize or protect visitation rights when the prerequisites of the 1980 Hague Convention are met in relations with the State where the minor lives. It is not sufficient for that country to be simply foreign: it must be a State that applies the Convention in relations with Italy, including cases where an accession has been accepted by Italy.
The Ministry of Justice indicates that the Italian Central Authority can transmit the request to the Central Authority of the State of the child's habitual residence. The foreign authority can encourage amicable settlement and the voluntary restoration of contacts; if this does not occur, a proceeding before the competent court of the foreign State may follow. The path and operational information are described in the ministerial information sheet on visitation rights concerning minors residing abroad.
The Central Authority does not replace the judge. It does not unilaterally establish how many visits are due, it does not modify an Italian order, and it cannot impose an agreement between parents. Its function is one of cooperation: it helps connect the authorities of the two countries, transmit the application, and encourage the initiation of the procedure provided for in the State concerned.
It is not always necessary to already possess a judgment regulating visits and custody to activate the convention procedure. However, a judicial decision or a formalized agreement can make clearer which relationship is being asked to be protected. If prior regulation is missing, the competent authority in the place of the child's habitual residence may have to define the times, places, and conditions of contact for the first time.
A concrete request makes the problem understandable. Requested periods, holidays, travel arrangements, accompaniment, remote calls, and notice periods are not marginal details. They serve to transform the need to maintain a relationship into a program that takes into account school, the child's age, time zones, and their daily routine.
Enforcing an Italian Decision in Other European Union Member States
If an Italian order on visits already exists and the minor lives in a European Union Member State other than Denmark, Regulation (EU) 2019/1111, also known as Brussels II ter, may apply. Decisions on parental responsibility issued and enforceable in a Member State are enforceable in other Member States without any declaration of enforceability being required, pursuant to Article 34 of the Regulation.
This does not mean that sending an informal copy of the decision to the other parent is sufficient. To request enforcement, Article 35 normally requires a copy of the decision with the foreseen conditions of authenticity and the certificate issued pursuant to Article 36. The competent authority in the State of enforcement may also request the translation of the necessary documents. The text of Articles 34, 35, and 36 is available in Regulation (EU) 2019/1111 published on EUR-Lex.
The start date of the proceeding can change the applicable rules. Regulation 2019/1111 generally applies to proceedings instituted from August 1, 2022, as well as to authentic instruments and agreements that have become binding from that date. For disputes initiated earlier, transitional rules linked to the previous Brussels II bis Regulation may continue to operate. For this reason, it is not prudent to choose the path by looking solely at the date of the judgment.
Outside the European Union, one must not assume that an Italian order is immediately enforceable. An international convention, the legislation of the foreign State, or a local procedure for recognition and enforcement may be relevant. The first step is to understand whether you want to enforce an already existing rule or obtain new rules: these are different objectives that require different documents and authorities.
Modifying Contacts When Distance Renders the Old Schedule Unusable
A schedule designed for parents who live close to each other can become impracticable after a relocation abroad. Two weekends a month may not be compatible with flights, costs, school schedules, and travel times. In these cases, it is not useful to insist on a formula that, in practice, no one manages to respect: it is necessary to seek an arrangement that preserves continuity and predictability.
An adequate program may provide for longer stays during holidays, alternating holidays, certain days during compatible school periods, and video calls fixed at realistic times. Aspects that often generate new conflicts must also be clear: who organizes the trip, where the handover of the child takes place, what document is needed for travel, and how far in advance variations can be requested.
Modification must not be imposed unilaterally. Retaining the child beyond the expected deadline, canceling contacts as a reaction to a dispute, or using the minor to send messages to the other parent can aggravate the conflict and damage the very protection requested. Instead, it is useful to keep an orderly record of the existing order or agreement, the proposals sent, the responses received, the dates of missed meetings, and the reasons given for the refusal.
The application for activation or protection of contacts is normally decided by the judicial authority of the State of the child's habitual residence, in accordance with the law of that State. This indication, also reported in the FAQs of the ministerial page dedicated to visitation rights abroad, explains why the place where the minor stably lives matters more than the nationality of the parents or the place where the first agreement was issued.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can I request the intervention of the Italian Central Authority if my child lives abroad?
Yes, if the 1980 Hague Convention is applicable in relations with that State. The Central Authority can cooperate with the foreign authority to organize or protect the effective exercise of contacts. However, it does not unilaterally decide the schedule: if an agreement is not reached, the definition of visits is up to the competent judicial authority.
Is a judgment regulating visits already required?
No, not always. The indications of the Ministry of Justice specify that, in general, a previous judicial order is not indispensable to activate the convention procedure on visitation rights. An already existing decision nevertheless remains useful because it identifies with greater precision the contacts to be implemented or recognized.
Can I enforce an Italian visitation order abroad?
Regulation 2019/1111 may apply in other EU Member States, except Denmark, if the case falls within its temporal scope and the order is enforceable in Italy. Normally, a certified copy of the decision and the certificate provided for by the Regulation are required. Outside the European Union, however, applicable conventions and the rules of the State concerned must be considered.
Can I ask to modify visits because travel is too difficult?
Yes, when the schedule is no longer compatible with the minor's actual life. Distance can justify a different organization, such as longer holidays, alternating holidays, and regular digital contacts. However, modification must be requested or agreed upon in the appropriate forms: it cannot be imposed unilaterally by one parent.
Can I keep my child in Italy beyond the established deadline because the other parent hinders meetings?
No, reacting with unilateral retention can create a more serious problem. Failure to respect visits must be addressed with the relevant tools of cooperation, enforcement, or modification. Exceeding the authorized period can affect the other parent's right and, under certain circumstances, give rise to an issue of international child abduction.
Before Choosing the Path
The most useful protection depends on the real problem: enforcement of an already clear decision, modification of a schedule that has become impracticable, cooperation through Central Authorities, or an application for the return of the minor have different prerequisites and purposes. If you need guidance, you can contact me by bringing the existing order or agreement, information on your child's habitual residence, and an orderly reconstruction of the missed meetings.