The organization Šance dětem https://sancedetem.cz/cochemska-praxe mentions that the Cochem Practice began to be applied in the Czech Republic in June 2016, specifically by the District Court in Nový Jičín. However, as practice shows (see "Consequences"), its presence in the Czech Republic occurred much earlier.
Let's Learn How To Accurately Identify The Cause...
We often mistakenly see the source of our pain as the cause. We can't go further because the pain is too strong.
Example: In court rulings, I often see the cause of divorce listed as "lover" or "mistress." But is that really correct?...No, that is not the true cause of the breakdown of the marriage. You have to go further back in time... much further than you might think right now. The cause of the marriage breakdown lies far in the past. And this pattern will continue to repeat until you choose to change it — and only you can and have the power to do that.
Let's explore an attempt to uncover the root cause using a real-life example.
We are beginning a study: Why did the child decide to self-harm? What was the root cause?
We start, quite logically, from the end — and aim to trace the path all the way back to the beginning. We only present what has been verified and officially reported in public media.
(Please do not consider this case study as one-sided, biased against men. It can be applied identically to a violent woman. If you manage to uncover the root cause, you'll find it is the same in both cases. In the "Consequences" section, you'll find examples of psychological or physical violence committed by both men and women against children.)
The desired goal of this study is to cleanse the root cause of those consequences that torment our children, loving mothers, and loving fathers.
1) The boy committed suicide because he had psychological problems.
Is this the true cause? No, it is not. This is a consequence of something that happened earlier...
2) The boy was unhappy, suffered from depression, had no will to live, didn't want to go home, was afraid of his father. The father did not treat him with love and abused him — both psychologically and physically. A large number of independent witnesses testified in court about the abuse. In 2025, the father was convicted of abusing his son, as the abuse led to the boy's suicide.
Is this the true cause? The boy certainly took his own life as a result of the abuse by his father — but it didn't have to end that way. This is also a consequence of something that happened before...
3) Why did the boy live with a violent father...?
In 2016, the mother fought for sole custody of her son. During the court proceedings, she pointed to the violence committed by the father within the family and, quite logically, did not support extended contact between the child and the father. The mother lost the custody battle, and based on the court's decision, she saw her son only minimally — just once every two weeks for the weekend. The boy was afraid to speak about the violence to his mother. He feared his father's reaction.
So, is the true cause the decision made by the court and the child protection authority to place the child in the father's care?
The fact that judges and the child protection authority decided against the child's best interest — the right to live a childhood filled with happiness, love, and understanding — certainly led to all the consequences described above. But why do they make such decisions?
Why did the court and OSPOD harm a loving mother and child by placing the child, against his will, in the care of a violent father? Why did they decide so clearly against the child's best interest — when a child should grow up in happiness, love, and understanding, as felt solely and uniquely by the child , and as required by the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which the Czech Republic is bound to uphold?
Let us go even further back in time... and try to search for the root cause there.
What influences have affected — and continue to affect — custody proceedings in the Czech Republic since 1992?
Alternating custody has been practically possible in the Czech Republic since 1998, when it was introduced by the then Family Act. Currently, alternating custody is regulated by Act No. 89/2012 Coll., the Civil Code, which came into effect on January 1, 2014.
Cochem Practice: 1992–Present
11/10/2025
Jürgen Karl Rudolf is one of the founders of the Cochem Practice in 1992. In his speech (available via the link above), the following key ideas are essential for understanding the motivation behind its creation. What you should especially pay attention to is highlighted in bold:
Let's summarize the facts under the microscope:
Main ideas on which the practice is based (Cochem practice, parental equality, alternating custody):
- We look at care through the eyes of the child, which according to this practice means that the child does not want the divorce, and wishes to stay with both parents.
- The opinion of the parents is disregarded – one is like this, the other is different, so forget diagnoses (violence and emotional coldness of one parent do not exist without a court ruling on guilt, the past is of no concern). This idea is deeply rooted in today's society and is publicly communicated by part of the population (see detail below)*.
- Institutions (child protection services, experts, psychologists, lawyers) cooperate. Their goal is to educate parents to act in the best interest of the child, which is defined as maintaining a relationship with both parents.
- If one parent permanently or repeatedly prevents the other from caregiving, such behavior is a reason for the court to decide differently (in other words, if you speak of violence or emotional coldness without a ruling of guilt, it becomes a reason for the court to rule differently).
Main ideas and facts speaking against:
- Looking at care through the eyes of the child means empathizing with the child, so that in the chosen care arrangement the child is happy, content, and lives in love and understanding — and this must truly be from the child's perspective. In many cases, the child actually wants the divorce and wishes to stay with only one parent, because the shared household the other parent showed no interest in the child during the relationship (the formal interest in caregiving may be driven by other motives), or the other parent did provide care, but without love. What matters is an analysis of the relationship history and a conversation between the child and a professional, where the child feels safe and unafraid to speak These conversations should always be recorded , including those with the judge, to allow for potential review (risk of manipulation or suggestive influence).
- According to the Convention on the Rights of the Child, member states recognize "that for the full and harmonious development of their personality, the children must grow up in a family environment, in an atmosphere of happiness, love, and understanding. "
* Roundtable: Children as Hostages of the System? – 17.03.2025
Discussion between Mr. Hodina (Union of Fathers), hereafter "H", and various questioners, hereafter "Q"
Deeply rooted ideas
H: We need to ask ourselves: "Who is the perpetrator of violence?" Is it someone who is simply labeled as violent without any proof? Q: A proven perpetrator. H: We need to consider the degree of violence, because we've probably all committed some form of minor violence in our lives — maybe we shoved someone or did something small. Let's admit that. Q: Well, that really shouldn't happen at all. H: And furthermore, we need to distinguish who the violence was directed at. We shouldn't confuse the parent-child relationship with the relationship between the parents themselves, because the relationship between parents changes with their separation. Hana Šindlerová (ONŽ): Regarding your criminal accusations — please, when someone is violent, we really shouldn't be debating whether violence against a child is worse than violence against a woman. If someone is violent, then they are a perpetrator, and that's what criminal proceedings are for. The fact that penalties in the Czech Republic are too low, and that the police don't always act decisively to remove the perpetrator from the household — I could show you examples from our cases. H: Can you define what a proven violent person is? Q: If you have evidence that someone beats the mother and the child, and psychologically destroys them… H: So is that someone who has been legally convicted of violence? Q: No, not necessarily convicted. H: Then it's just talk. Q: No — the person beats someone, they go to the doctor and have visible bruises; if the child sees a psychologist and has emotional trauma, wets themselves, can't function normally — is it really okay to give custody to such a parent? H: You know, I've encountered so many false accusations of violence that I don't take such claims seriously. It needs to be proven, then we can talk. But in many cases, the mother even engaged in self-harm to blame the father.
H:"A child needs both parents, and perhaps we shouldn't dwell so much on the past, but rather focus on the future. On what lies ahead.
Roundtable: Children as Hostages of the System? – 17.03.2025 Can be found under the filter "Elections to the Chamber of Deputies of the Czech Republic 2021", and I recommend watching the full recording, as it also contains important consequences.
Mr. Hodina represents the Union of Fathers. What else do we publicly know about him?
From a 2018 article in Respekt magazine, the following quote is quite telling: "In Reflex, I wrote about Mr. Aleš Hodina, specifically about his extremely conflict-ridden battles over his sons with his two divorced wives. Mr. Hodina is also a passionate Facebook debater. When he shared his aforementioned article 'Why Not Support Single Mothers' on Facebook, he commented under it: 'Looks like all those bitches who deny children their fathers are flocking here. The post provoked them well.' A Facebook user replied: 'God forbid a child has your temperament.' And Hodina responded like a true gentleman: 'Are you afraid that they'll stand up to the kind of bitches I'm talking about?' He continued: 'I really have no respect for some women and cannot have any.' 'And that's what you teach your children. Well, that's just great,' the commenter replied. 'Yes, I teach and will keep teaching. Women who cut fathers off from their children do not deserve respect,' Mr. Hodina triumphantly concluded."
"Apart from the extremely conflictual and controversial nature of his own post-divorce disputes, Mr. Hodina has absolutely no qualifications to lecture on divorces. Yet he is the author of numerous articles on the subject that make any reasonable person feel nauseous. Particularly striking is his essay 'Why Not Support Single Mothers,' and another piece that draws attention is his reflection 'He Raped a Girl and Married Her,' where he argues that it is good for a rape victim to marry her aggressor."
In 2018, Prague 5 councilor Naděžda Priečinská told Reflex: "I consider Mr. Hodina's extreme, grossly offensive, and aggressive statements, which you describe, to be unacceptable and I strongly condemn them. These aspects of his presentation go beyond the boundaries of free expression of a differing opinion and become vulgar aggression. In light of this, I am distancing myself from the event in question. Today I also requested the municipal council to revoke my patronage of this event."
Even though the Prague 5 councilor stated back in 2018 that Mr. Hodina's statements go beyond the boundaries of free expression of a differing opinion and amount to vulgar aggression, as of 2025 Mr. Hodina still appears publicly, handing out business cards and flyers at official events (round tables in the Chamber of Deputies, round tables in the Senate, and professional workshops).
On Domestic Violence
- The National Institute of Public Health stated: 'Domestic violence is understood as physical, psychological, sexual, or economic abuse between close persons, which occurs repeatedly in their private environment, outside the control of the public. " https://www.nzip.cz/clanek/101-domaci-nasili-zakladni-informace and it occurs in every fourth family. https://szu.gov.cz/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/domaci_nasili_11_B_C.pdf
- Explanatory report dated May 29, 2024: 'One of the reasons for the low rate of reporting domestic violence cases and seeking professional help is the high level of trivialization, victim-blaming, and the failure to address domestic violence in its early stages." https://www.zakonyprolidi.cz/cs/2025-78/souvislosti
- Crime statistics from the Police of the Czech Republic: 'Crime statistics do not work with the term "domestic violence." Information that was not provided to the applicant is considered a request to create new information.." https://policie.gov.cz/clanek/domaci-nasili-statistiky.aspx
- Statistical Yearbook on Domestic and Gender-Based Violence in the Czech Republic (The material was prepared by the coordinator from the Department of Gender Equality as part of the OPZ Plus project Coordination of the implementation of the Gender Equality Strategy for the years 2021–2030):
- TSK185 – Abuse of a Dependent Person (§ 198) In 2022, a total of 243 cases of abuse of a dependent person were registered. A total of 126 individuals were prosecuted – 76 men and 50 women. The highest number of prosecuted individuals was recorded in the age category of 30–39 years. The victims were exclusively children, with the vast majority being under the age of 10.
- TSK186 – Abuse of a Person Living in a Shared Household (§ 199) In 2022, 430 cases of abuse of a person living in a shared household were registered. A total of 286 individuals were prosecuted – 274 men and 12 women. The highest number of prosecuted individuals was recorded in the age category of 30–39 years. The most frequent victim was a woman (92%).
Questions to ask 1): We see what has been registered. We know that victims are afraid to report. The yearbook was created based on statistical data provided by the Police Presidium of the Czech Republic and the Ministry of Justice — that is, reported and proven cases. Wouldn't it be appropriate, for a more complete picture, to also include violence against a child or committed against a parent, reported by the parent or child to the Authority for Social and Legal Protection of Children? Isn't it the case that only a minimal number of cases reach the registration phase? Psychological violence is difficult to prove effectively — is it even reasonable to demand proof at the expense of a child's happiness, love, and well-being?
Questions to ask 2): If the goal is for the child to have a happy and fulfilling childhood, isn't the purest method to look to the history of the family relationship and to the child's own opinion — that is, how they perceive their relationship with their mother and father?
Questions to ask 3): If we were to trust children and respect their wishes, wouldn't that prevent the negative consequences that arise in practice?
Questions to ask 4): If violence is present in every fourth family (some media sources even state every third), then which type of marriage is more likely to end in divorce, in your opinion? One without violence or one with violence? And if a violent marriage ends in divorce and a custody dispute arises, where the child wishes to be with only one parent due to psychological or physical abuse — which is very difficult to prove in practice — who will be granted custody of the child? Will it be the violent parent, or the loving and previously caring parent?
Questions to ask 5):
Who do you think is easier to calm — the victim or the aggressor? Before you answer, listen to the statement of JUDr. Lucie Hrdá, an attorney specializing in criminal law, domestic violence, stalking, and family law. In criminal proceedings, she represents clients both in defense and as counsel for victims. In family law, she represents parents in matters concerning minor children as well as spouses in property settlements and divorces.
https://www.facebook.com/reel/1525882278780140
Ms. Holá: Soon there will be no one to represent the victims, and I think that is what the state wants. I say this quite honestly.
TV moderator: Why should the state want this?
Ms. Holá: because it's easier for them when the victims don't have lawyers. We don't complain, victims do not report, we don't add work to the state.
TV moderator: As you said it quite honestly. I don't really know how to describe it if it was like that. Does that mean that the state, by its actions, would intentionally deny one part of the people the opportunity to be defended?
Ms. Holá: yes. And I think it's a real threat. At least the Chamber of lawyers has been pointing out for a long time that the same will soon be the case with ex officio defences, where lawyers are actually being cut there too, although much less, so lawyers are also opting out of it in droves; So maybe the system needs to fall and crash. Soon there will be no one to represent the victims, and I think that is what the state wants.
We charge according to the lawyer's tariff and then a decision comes that reduces our remuneration by up to 90%, adding up apples and oranges. I know that there are WhatsApp groups at individual courts where they discuss how else to rip off a lawyer. If we want a lawyer not to be a legal staffage - as we officially have one here, but unofficially we won't pay him - then we have to do something about it," says attorney Lucie Hrdá about the courts' approach to attorneys for particularly vulnerable victims.
Because of this long-term practice, she asked to be removed from the register of providers of assistance to victims of crime. "The Bar Association has long pointed out that the same will soon be the case with ex officio defences. I have always been on the side of both perpetrators and victims. As a lawyer, you get much more money for the perpetrator than for the victims, that doesn't apply to the state," she adds.
https://www.facebook.com/DVTV.cz/videos/1091152209193522
Ms Hrda: I have always been on the side of both of them, not in one case of course, but on the side of both abusers and victims. And it is definitely true that you get much more money for the abuser than for the victims. And from my point of view, it's much less emotional work. And whether I'm unpunished or not, it has nothing to do with it.
TV moderator: Will you get paid more for the abuser?
Ms. Hrda: Well, they pay us based on hours spent.
TV moderator: And this does not apply to the state?
Ms. Hrda: This does not apply to the state.
TV moderator: So it's not really a matter of the state too much. At that particular moment.
Ms. Hrda: yes.
Questions to ask 5): What is your opinion on the statement made by Ms. Reem Alsalem?? Press Conference: Reem Alsalem - červen 2025 Special Rapporteur on violence against women and girls - UN Human Rights Council
So now you know what influences affect custody proceedings in the Czech Republic. But why?
Why is the history of the relationship not examined — that is, whether both parents lovingly cared for the child, or which parent has lovingly cared for the child so far, and in what environment the child was truly happy — so that we can ensure the child grows up in happiness, love, and understanding, as required by the Convention on the Rights of the Child?
Why is a child placed in alternating custody solely based on the fact that a parent requests it? Why have courts awarded sole custody to an unloving parent, even when the child did not wish for such custody, and the endangered parent did not support the relationship with that parent because the parent wanted to ensure the child would grow up happy and free from psychological or physical pain?
We need to go even further...
Let's summarize the strategy: we have a "black mark" because:
- The share of economically inactive women due to caregiving responsibilities is among the highest in the EU.
- The difference in employment between women with a child under six years of age and women without children was the highest in the EU.
- In terms of the employment gap between women and men aged 20–64, the Czech Republic has long ranked among the worst countries in the EU.
And how do we plan to eliminate this according to the strategy? Through measures aimed at removing gender inequalities and achieving a state in which both women and men can fully develop their potential regardless of gender. The goal is to improve the quality of life for all people and to reach a level fully comparable with advanced European countries.
How could we improve this, following the example of advanced countries?
1) Increase flexibility in the labor market
Mothers want to work. But the system must allow them to do so. In the Czech Republic, part-time jobs make up only 6% of all positions, while the EU average is 18%.
In the Czech Republic, only about half of mothers with children under the age of four are employed, even though most of them would like to work at least part-time. This was highlighted by economist Klára Kalíšková from the IDEA think tank at CERGE-EI and the Faculty of Informatics and Statistics at the University of Economics in Prague.
If all mothers could work according to their preferences—meaning if barriers such as the lack of preschool facilities were removed and companies offered more part-time positions—the state budget would, according to her, benefit by billions."
19. 3. 2025
https://www.novinky.cz/clanek/ekonomika-matky-malych-deti-chteji-pracovat-ale-casto-nemohou-40513561
Examples of "how to do it" from developed countries:
Netherlands:
For decades, the country followed a traditional model in which the man was seen as the breadwinner. However, in the 1980s and 1990s, women entered the labor market with part-time jobs. Part-time work has become the norm—mothers can gradually increase their working hours according to the needs of the family.
Germany (2023):
In 2023, 31% of employees in Germany worked part-time (13% of them were men). The trend in many workplaces continues to shift toward prioritizing personal life. Last year, 45 German companies conducted a six-month experiment, switching to a four-day workweek. Employees were able to work fewer hours for the same pay.
Experts argue that the low number of hours worked is not due to laziness, but to structural forces that make full-time work especially difficult for women. According to the EU statistical office, in 2023, 48% of employed women in Germany worked part-time, compared to just over 10% of men. Among mothers, this share was as high as 65%. Many schools finish classes early in the afternoon, and after-school programs don't offer much better hours, making it harder for parents to work full-time.
Belgium:
In February 2022, Belgians won the right to a shorter workweek without a reduction in pay, and the law officially came into effect on November 21, 2023. People can now choose whether to work four or five days a week. Then-Prime Minister Alexander De Croo expressed hope that this change would improve the flexibility of the Belgian labor market and help people better balance family life with their careers.
Iceland:
A long-time advocate of the four-day workweek, Iceland conducted research on the effects of this trend between 2015 and 2019. The project involved 2,500 employees—about 1% of the country's workforce. Their working hours were reduced from 40 to 35 per week without a pay cut, and the results showed improvements in productivity, satisfaction, and wellbeing.
https://www.finance.cz/552527-zkracene-uvazky-nemecko/
Japan began promoting this trend as early as 2021 as part of a plan to address overwork, mental health issues, and declining birth rates. For public sector employees, the shorter workweek has been officially in effect since April of this year.
2) Increase the number of places in kindergartens and childcare groups
3) Increase flexibility in the labor market
– Companies do not sufficiently offer remote work, job sharing, or project-based collaboration.
What further increases the employment of women and mothers of very young children?
Let's first go far back into the past...the years 1996–2018
We see that in the initial decision, the child is largely entrusted to the mother's care (blue color); over the years, this trend declines. In the first proceeding, the child is usually placed in the mother's care through an agreement between the parents (i.e., one parent expresses interest in custody, while the other does not, or only expresses interest in contact with the child).
In this phase, the employment of women and mothers of very young children clearly will not increase according to the strategy – there is no opportunity for equal rights between fathers and mothers.
Note for reflection 1): A parent who does not show interest in custody must not be generally forced into caregiving, as this could lead to violence against the child (not wanting to care may result in: I will not care with love). In this case, equal custody would clearly go against the child's best interest, since the fundamental condition is that the parent must show genuine interest in caregiving.
Note for reflection 2): Forcing a parent into caregiving is only acceptable in rare exceptional situations: a) serious illness of the caregiving parent, provided this parent explicitly requests help (e.g., advanced status of cancer), b) illness of the child that threatens the health of the caregiving parent due to its demands. In both cases, the condition must be met that the child will live in happiness, love, and understanding during the temporary situation, meaning the other parent must treat the child with love during this exceptional period.
Note for Reflection 3): Is it truly always an agreement? Women report in practice the method "I'll let you have the child only if you let me have the property" – this creates a risk of the first decision being tied to an unequal settlement of joint property through agreement. Therefore, a safety mechanism is needed to protect victims of unequal marital property settlement.
In the subsequent proceeding, namely "change of custody," the child is significantly more often entrusted to the father´s care (orange color), and alternating custody also plays a notable role.
Note for reflection 1): What truly leads the father to change his mind? Why did not he show interest before and now he has? Could it be unwillingness to pay child alimonies, or revenge against the other parent after the settlement of joint marital property? Is the child truly happy in the chosen custody arrangement?
Note for reflection 2): Joint marital property is not systematically protected during marriage – rights established by law cannot be practically enforced during marriage if the other spouse is unwilling to grant them; I have not found any official research from the post-divorce phase (interviews with divorced parents, interviews with children with a time gap after custody decisions). Research linked to court rulings in the Czech Republic, containing negative consequences, is available in the "About Me" section.
....and now let's take a look at more recent data (2017–2024) :
1) Custody in case of divorce and the initial decision
Statistics from the Ministry of Justice show that in the initial proceeding, the child is often entrusted to the mother's care, primarily based on an agreement between the parents, meaning the father statistically tends not to show genuine and sincere interest in custody.
Thus, what has already been mentioned still applies: the employment of women and mothers of very young children clearly will not increase according to the strategy – there is no opportunity for equal rights between fathers and mothers.
It is again worth recalling: a parent must not be generally forced into caregiving, as this could lead to violence against the child (not wanting to care may result in: I will not care with love).
However, joint and alternating custody based on agreement is also on the rise.
Question to ask 1): But is it truly an agreement? Or rather the result of a parent's fear that the child might be placed in institutional care or in the sole custody of the other parent? Are children in alternating custody truly happy? Do they live in happiness, love, and understanding?
2) Further decision (change of custody)
Statistics from the Ministry of Justice show that in further decisions (change of custody), where the father now expresses interest in caregiving, the child is primarily entrusted to the father´s sole care (orange color), and alternating custody (green color) significantly increases as well.
Question to ask 1): Isn't it the case that state-imposed equal custody – equality between mother and father, i.e., the default model of alternating custody – leads in practice to a situation where either the parent accepts alternating custody, or if not, the child is entrusted to the one who does not obstruct the relationship with the other parent, as we have already learned from the influences affecting custody proceedings?
Question to ask 2): What causes the father to change his mind? Why does he suddenly demand custody he previously didn't want? Could it be unwillingness to pay alimony, already settled joint property (SJM) in favor of the father, or revenge against the mother? Is the child truly happy in the chosen custody arrangement?
Question to ask 3): Isn't it the case that the model of alternating custody/equality is a model that requires mutual respect – the father's respect for the mother and the mother's respect for the father – and if one does not respect the other, they lose custody? More in the sections "Consequences" and "About Me."
Question to ask 4): Equality between man/woman or husband/wife concerns only two individuals, so systemically balancing equality here is entirely appropriate. It's a matter of two people standing opposite each other. But can we truly equate mother and father when there is a third person in the relationship who has his own rights? Doesn't this create a significant risk of violence in cases where one parent does not feel love for the child, and the child does not feel love from that parent?
And now a few recent official statements:
1) Office of the Government Commissioner
"ECtHR: According to the Court, the statistics presented by the government did not confirm the applicant's claim of indirect discrimination. Instead, they show a growing trend over the years toward court decisions ordering alternating custody, even in cases where the parents disagree."
Note for reflection: Regarding the outcome of this particular case, it is worth noting that in terms of current practice development, this is an exceptional result in our society. As for the facts, it should be added that both the mother and father are judges in the Czech Republic, meaning that professionally both know how best how to present facts to the court and how to ensure evidence is entered into the case file; In this case, it involved expert opinions and the child's testimony.
https://msp.gov.cz/web/msp/rozcestnik/-/clanek/eslp-%C4%8Desk%C3%A9-soudy-otce-nediskriminuj%C3%AD.-%C5%A1trasbursk%C3%BD-soud-nevyhov%C4%9Bl-st%C3%AD%C5%BEnosti-otce-kter%C3%BD-se-dom%C3%A1hal-sv%C4%9B%C5%99en%C3%AD-d%C4%9Bt%C3%AD-do-st%C5%99%C3%ADdav%C3%A9-p%C3%A9%C4%8De-a-sn%C3%AD%C5%BEen%C3%AD-v-1
2) Czech Statistical Office
"The employment rate of women has long lagged behind that of men, although the gap is gradually narrowing."
https://csu.gov.cz/zamestnanost-a-mzdy-zen-a-muzu?pocet=10&start=0&skupiny=30,42&razeni=-datumVydani
And now a few words on equal custody
Statement by Ms. Decroix "Equal custody means that both parents retain parental authority even after divorce, and if one of the parents does not exercise that authority — for example, does not pay alimony, does not see the child at all, shows no interest — then it is possible to limit that parental authority in some way. But equal does not mean evenly split."
https://www.facebook.com/reel/1083289629866358
I also commented on this reel; my contributions are listed below:
- Please describe how, in practice, it will be demonstrated (what will be required as proof) that a The parent does not have healthy parental authority.
- Healthy parental authority is based on mutual respect and trust between parents and children, not merely on enforcing obedience, and I'm interested in how it will be proven that a parent does not possess such authority.
- I'm asking how it will be demonstrated that a parent does not have healthy parental authority toward their child — that is, that trust and respect are absent, and only enforced obedience is present.
- I understand your point, but the definition of parental authority is as follows:"Parental authority refers to the ability of parents to influence the behavior and actions of their children, based on respect and trust, not merely on enforced obedience." And that's what I'm asking about. There is no such formulation in Parliamentary Print 728, nor in the explanatory report. However, the definition of parental authority is clear and can be easily found. The explanatory report only includes comments from research studies regarding parental authority — for example: Poland: "Persons exercising parental authority and providing care for a minor may not use corporal punishment." France: "Parental authority is exercised without any physical or psychological violence."
...to this day, I have not received a response to my question that would constitute a genuine answer. I am still waiting for the answer. Healthy parental authority lies in a combination of unconditional love and respect, along with the setting of clear and firm boundaries and consistency. A parent should be a source of support and a guide for the child — someone who is an authority in the sense of providing protection, supporting healthy development, and offering guidance, not an authoritarian figure who merely gives orders. The key is to communicate openly, listen attentively, and be consistent, while also giving the child space for independence and teaching them responsibility.
Question to ask 1): Is it possible to equate the rights of the mother and the father — that is, to apply so-called equal/shared care and grant each parent the default model of parental authority — when the rights of the child, which the Czech Republic is obligated to protect, are directly affected? Specifically, the child's right to live in happiness, love, and understanding? Aren't these parental rights and the child's rights, in practice, actually in conflict? In other words, if parents have the right to equal/shared care, isn't the child's right suppressed when a parent lacks healthy parental authority? Doesn't this create a significant risk of violence being committed against the child?
Question to ask 2):When creating legislation, we draw from experience and the past. Shouldn't we also base decisions about custody solely on the past and not turn a blind eye to it? Shouldn't we look at the child's history — how the child perceives their childhood so far, where and with whom they feel trust and safety, how the father and mother have treated the child in the past, and whether the child has been subjected to violence or witnessed violence committed against one parent by the other? If we remove the child from the care of the parent whom the child perceives as loving — their anchor — aren't we initiating violence against the child, which leads to suffering? Isn't it, for example, deeply frustrating and psychologically devastating for a child to be forced into alternating custody with a parent he does not know, spend minimal time with, or who has committed violence against the child or the other parent? Aren't we initiating violence by requiring the trusted and safe parent to force the child — against child´s will — to go to the other parent (secondary victimization)? For a child, it is distressing to go to someone they perceive as a stranger, or to someone with whom there is no established trust, safety, love, happiness, or understanding. The child is afraid, does not want to — he feels this as violence commited to him. And if the loving parent, with whom the child has so far felt safe and loved, starts commanding them to do something which hurts the child, isn't that secondary violence? Doesn't the child then end up in a state where he no longer trusts anyone, no one understands how he feels, he no longer has a close person, and he lose hope for a happy life — he resigns?
If the child does not know the parent, and there has been no violence against the child or the other parent, wouldn't it be better to introduce the child to the parent gradually — in the presence of the parent with whom the child feels safe and loved? For example, through visits or short shared outings? Or do you believe the relationship can be repaired by placing the child in a violent or coercive situation?
Question to ask 3): If we focus solely on the past — and do so immediately and mandatorily during the first hearing, which takes place within one month of bringing the case to court — doesn't that eliminate the time window in which so-called indoctrination by one parent can occur, resulting in the child rejecting the other parent? This phenomenon, known as parental alienation, is currently highly emphasized in today's society.
What is the Istanbul Convention?
First, carefully listen to the interview of Matěj Skalický with Silvie Lauder, a journalist from Respekt, dated April 25, 2023.
Věra Jourová on the Convention, April 23, 2023: "I expected the Czech Republic to ratify it without any doubt. But then a public debate emerged, initiated by the Catholic Church, which shifted the Istanbul Convention into a completely different context than what it actually represents. Today, it has taken on a life of its own and holds symbolic meaning for both sides — for the conservative side, which claims the Convention is harmful, and for those who see it as a useful tool to improve the fight against domestic violence and violence against women."
Is it still necessary to ratify the Convention in the Czech Republic, given that in June 2023 EU member states approved accession to the Istanbul Convention (Council of Europe Convention on Preventing and Combating Violence Against Women and Domestic Violence)?
The European Union as a whole has become a party to the Convention in matters that fall within the EU's competence. However, if we want the Convention to apply in its full scope, national ratification is necessary. Ratification would express full support for the fight against violence against women and domestic violence.
What would we gain, among other things, within the "full scope" package?
Let's take a look at the GREVIO monitoring mechanism.
GREVIO is an expert group that oversees the implementation of the Istanbul Convention in countries that have ratified it.
Elif Sariaydin (Department of Violence Against Women, Secretariat of the Istanbul Convention Monitoring Mechanism, Council of Europe), in her presentation, among other things, mentions frequent failures of member states in relation to Article 31:
GREVIO prepares a preliminary baseline evaluation report for the given state, which:
- Analyzes the level of implementation of nearly all provisions of the Convention by the state;
- Identifies gaps;
- Presents recommendations for improving the situation.
You can study the full presentation here: https://www.era-comm.eu/oldoku/SNLLaw/15_Istanbul_Convention/124DV43_Sariaydin_CZ.pdf
1) Evaluation Reports for the Given State
GREVIO issues evaluation reports, which are public and available here.
https://www.coe.int/en/web/istanbul-convention/country-monitoring-work
You naturally won't find the Czech Republic there yet, as it has not ratified the Convention so far.
So for now, let's at least take a look at Slovakia — they have a similar model to ours in the Czech Republic and ratified the Convention as early as 2015. In June 2025, the Committee stated in section B many recommendations for this country, including, for example, "the adoption of additional measures to ensure comprehensive data collection on all forms of violence covered by the Convention." Slovakia has had the Convention ratified for 10 years, yet as of June 2025, this data was still not available.
2) Example of GREVIO's work – Citation of GREVIO conclusions during court proceedings at the ECtHR
e.g. ECtHR Case I.M. and Others v. Italy (European Court of Human Rights) – November 10, 2022 (app. no. 25426/20)
- What the mother and children suffered from: The mother (first applicant) and her two children (second and third applicants) were victims of domestic violence by the father. The children were exposed to direct violence and also witnessed violence against their mother, which seriously disrupted their psychological and emotional balance. Despite ongoing criminal proceedings against the father for abuse, the children were forced to meet with him in an unprotected environment.
- Decisions of the Italian courts: In 2015, the guardianship court allowed the father to have contact with the children once a week in a "strictly protected" environment in the presence of a psychologist. In reality, however, the meetings took place in inappropriate locations (e.g., a library, a town square, a room at the town hall) without professional supervision. Since 2016, the meetings were marked by the father's aggressive behavior. When the mother refused to bring the children to the meetings, she was labeled as a parent obstructing the restoration of the relationship, and the court suspended her parental rights. The children remained in contact with the father despite repeated reports of his aggression. The court suspended contact only in November 2018, nearly two years after the first warning. In 2019, the mother's parental rights were restored, and the father's were revoked.
- GREVIO's opinion – Citation of GREVIO conclusions during court proceedings at the ECtHR: The European Court shared the concerns of the expert group GREVIO regarding the practice of Italian civil courts, which often ignore domestic violence when deciding on child custody. The Court criticized the tendency to label mothers who refuse contact between children and the father due to violence as "uncooperative" and "unfit" parents, which leads to sanctions, including the removal of parental rights.
- How it ended: The European Court of Human Rights unanimously ruled that Italy had violated Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (the right to respect for family life) with regard to both the children and the mother.
The Court found that the Italian authorities had failed to protect the applicants' rights, had not considered the best interests of the children, and had committed secondary victimization. Italy was ordered to pay non-pecuniary damages of EUR 7,000 jointly to the children.
https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-220989%22]}
Question to ask 1): So why don't we ratify the Convention? It would protect our children and vulnerable parents...
Question to ask 2): If our children are protected and live in happiness, love, and understanding, wouldn't both the loving father and the loving mother be happy as well?
Let's go back to the very beginning and ask the questions again: Why did the child commit suicide? Why was the father allowed to abuse the child? Why did the court and the child protection authority (OSPOD) decide on exclusive custody for the father, and why did the mother's request for sole custody fail, even though the father behaved insensitively in the household? Have you managed to identify the cause of this specific case?
If so, you may have just discovered the root cause of the consequences you and your children are facing in your personal lives... for example:
- The child does not live in happiness, love, and understanding due to decisions made by the court and child protection services.
- The child is being psychologically or physically abused by the parent who has custody.
- The child has been placed in an institution, in so-called "neutral" surroundings, until the parents "come to an agreement."
- The child must see a psychologist to learn how to respect the non-loving parent.
- The child has been entrusted to the care of a non-loving parent, while the care of the previously fully nurturing parent has been suppressed.
- You have been punished with a fine or imprisonment for not handing over the child.
- The child is frequently ill, you only have caregiver's leave (OČR), your income is insufficient, and the court recommends that you find a second job during the time the other parent is caring for the child.
- The court tells you to find a nanny/caregiver and work full-time instead of part-time or even a 75% workload...