Separated Parents Best Child Travel Tips is explained by Kevin Zeng of MacLean Law. MacLean Law knows travelling with children after separation can be problematic. MacLean Law has one of the largest family law firms in Canada and is renowned for our winning court record. We also are proud to have one of the best Vancouver Mandarin and Cantonese family lawyers teams.
Vancouver Best Practices when Travelling with Children (携带儿童旅行的最佳做法) Tel: 604 602 9000
Separated spouses may still travel alone with their children, without the other parent being present. However, the parent looking to travel with the children should be cognizant of the extra requirements when travelling with their children to minimize the chance of conflict and costly litigation. This blog will outline some of the steps parents must take along with best practices to adhere to before hitting the road. The Canadian government website also has travel information for parents travelling with their children.
Best Vancouver Separated Parents Best Child Travel Tips Tel: 604 602 9000
已分居的配偶仍然可以单独带孩子旅行，而无需另一方陪同。然而，计划与孩子一起旅行的父母应注意在携带孩子出行时可能需要额外的手续，以尽量减少冲突和昂贵的诉讼风险。本文将概述父母在启程前应采取的一些措施，以及应遵循的最佳做法。
Spouses who are separated or divorced are required to undertake significantly more work and coordination when deciding to travel with their children, especially internationally. Regardless of the duration or location of travel, communication is key.
分居或离婚的配偶在决定与孩子一起旅行时，尤其是出国旅行，需要进行更多的准备和协调。无论旅行的时间长短或目的地在哪里，沟通始终是关键。
Best BC Separated Parents Best Child Travel Tips
Section 39 of the BC Family Law Act (the “FLA”) states that “parents are generally guardians”. In British Columbia, only guardians may exercise parental responsibilities. Section 41 of the FLA provides a comprehensive, albeit non-exhaustive list of parental responsibilities which include making decisions with respect to the children’s travel arrangements.
Best Mandarin Chinese Separated Parents Best Child Travel Tips Tel: 604 602 9000
《不列颠哥伦比亚省家庭法案》（简称“FLA”）第39条规定，“父母通常是监护人”。在不列颠哥伦比亚省，只有监护人才能行使父母责任。FLA第41条列出了一份详尽但非穷尽的父母责任清单，其中包括为子女的旅行安排做出决策。
Section 44 of the FLA is important as it allows parents to make agreements in relation to parenting responsibilities for the children, which as mentioned above, includes travel arrangements. What should these “agreements” look like?
FLA第44条非常重要，因为它允许父母就子女的监护责任达成协议，如上所述，这包括旅行安排。那么，这些“协议”应当是什么样的呢？
Obtaining Consent to Travel (获取旅行同意)
The parent seeking consent should clearly communicate to the other parent that they wish to travel with the children. It is important that the other parent is apprised of the dates of travel, location of travel, and provided a general itinerary of the trip; the more detail the better. It is best practice to keep these sorts of communication in writing such as via email or text message.
寻求同意的一方父母应明确告知另一方希望带孩子一起旅行。重要的是，另一方父母应被告知旅行的日期、目的地，并提供大致的行程安排；信息越详细越好。最佳做法是将此类沟通以书面形式进行，例如通过电子邮件或短信。
There is no legal requirement to carry consent letters when a child is only travelling with one parent domestically. Confirmation through text message or email should suffice when travelling domestically, to avoid allegations or disputes about parenting arrangements. However, it is always prudent to obtain notarized travel consent letters.
当孩子在国内仅与一方父母旅行时，法律上并不强制要求携带同意书。通过短信或电子邮件进行确认通常已足够，以避免有关育儿安排的指控或争议。然而，获取经过公证的旅行同意书始终是明智之举。
The importance of obtaining notarized travel consent letters is even more important when travelling with children internationally. Failure to formally document consent could lead to high-conflict Hague Convention proceedings where one parent could allege child abduction. Cases such as De Oliveira v. Campbell 2019 BCSC 623 and Tsui v. Chow 2024 BCSC 1291 were complex Hague Convention proceedings where it was ultimately left to the court to decide the intention of the parties and the children’s links to each country. A detailed and clear notarized consent letter can help reduce or ultimately eliminate costly Hague hearings.
在与孩子进行国际旅行时，获取经过公证的旅行同意书显得尤为重要。若未能正式记录同意，可能会引发高度冲突的《海牙公约》案件，其中一方父母可能指控对方绑架儿童。例如 De Oliveira v. Campbell 2019 BCSC 623 和 Tsui v. Chow 2024 BCSC 1291 案件，都是复杂的《海牙公约》案件，最终由法院决定双方的意图以及孩子与各国之间的联系。一份详细且明确的公证同意书有助于减少，甚至完全避免代价高昂的《海牙公约》听证会。
Aside from the risk of costly litigation, there may also be issues with border control and potential entry refusal depending on the country if the parent is unable to produce notarized travel consent letters.
除了高额诉讼的风险外，如果父母无法出示公证的旅行同意书，可能还会遇到边境控制问题，并根据不同国家的规定，可能会被拒绝入境。
What if the Other Parent Refuses? (如果另一方父母拒绝怎么办?) Tel: 604 602 9000
If the other parent resists providing travel consent, there are a few ways to try to reach an amicable agreement with the resisting party:
如果另一方父母拒绝提供旅行同意，可以尝试以下几种方式与拒绝方达成友好协议：
- Offering the other parent “make-up” or “compensatory” parenting time for their time lost while the children were on vacation.
提供另一方父母“补偿”或“弥补”育儿时间，以弥补孩子度假期间失去的时间。
2. Allowing the other parent vacation time of similar length with the Children at a later date.
允许另一方父母在以后某个时间与孩子一起度假，时间长度相似。
If parents are still at an impasse, a Court application may be the only option. The Court will approve the travel if it is in the best interests of the Child under Section 37(1) of the FLA. Some factors (not all) the Court may consider are:
如果父母仍然无法达成一致，法院申请可能是唯一的选择。如果根据《家庭法案》第37(1)条款，旅行符合孩子的最佳利益，法院将批准该旅行。法院可能考虑的一些因素（并非全部）包括：
- Whether the vacation is necessary and reasons for travel. Genuine reasons such as visiting relatives abroad or educational trips are more likely to be permitted by the Court.
假期是否必要以及旅行的原因。像是探亲或教育旅行等真实的理由，更可能得到法院的批准。
2. Age of the child and whether the child will be safe and secure while travelling.
孩子的年龄以及孩子在旅行期间是否会安全和得到保障。
3. The child’s own preference and views. The Court will consider the child’s preferences if they are older.
孩子的偏好和意见。如果孩子年纪较大，法院会更有可能考虑孩子的意见。
The court may impose conditions on travel such as fixing the duration of the trip, ordering the travelling parent to provide the other parent detailed itineraries of the trip, and compensate the other parent for additional parenting time to be exercised on specified dates F.E.S v. C.E.S 2022 BCSC 1804.
法院可能会对旅行设置条件，例如确定旅行的持续时间，要求带孩子旅行的父母提供详细的行程安排，并在指定日期补偿另一方父母的额外育儿时间。F.E.S v. C.E.S 2022 BCSC 1804。
Absconding with Children（携带儿童潜逃）
Never travel with children before obtaining clear and unequivocal approval from the other parent. Failure to inform the other parent of travel plans and leaving without prior consent could lead to serious consequences and possible forfeiture of rights to travel with children in the future.
在未获得另一方父母明确无误的同意之前，切勿带孩子旅行。未告知另一方父母旅行计划并在未事先同意的情况下离开，可能会导致严重后果，并可能导致未来失去带孩子旅行的权利。
Section 64 of the FLA grants the court authority to restrict a parent from taking their children away from a specific geographical area or impose certain restrictions if the court is satisfied that there is a risk that the parent will not return the children to British Columbia. These restrictions are outlined in Section 64(2) where the Court can order one parent to:
《家庭法案》第64条授予法院在父母有可能不将孩子带回不列颠哥伦比亚省的情况下，限制父母带孩子离开特定地理区域或施加某些限制的权力。这些限制在第64(2)条中有所列明，法院可以命令一方父母：
- give security in any form the court directs;
以法院指示的任何形式提供担保；
2. surrender, to a person named by the court, passports and other travel records of the person who proposes to remove the child or of the child, or of both;
将提出带走孩子的一方或孩子的护照及其他旅行记录交给法院指定的人；
- transfer specific property to a trustee named by the court;
将特定财产转交给法院指定的受托人；
2. if there is an agreement or order respecting child support, pay the child support to a trustee named by the court.
如果有关于子女抚养费的协议或裁定，将抚养费支付给法院指定的受托人。
Conclusion （结论） Tel: 604 602 9000
Travelling with children during separation requires careful planning and effective communication to avoid allegations of parenting denial and in more serious instances, civil abduction. Lawyers at MacLean Law are experienced in ensuring their clients travel with their children with a peace of mind, knowing their actions are lawful and protected.
在分居期间带孩子旅行需要仔细的规划和有效的沟通，以避免育儿拒绝指控，甚至在更严重的情况下，避免民事绑架。MacLean Law 的律师经验丰富，能够确保客户在与孩子旅行时安心无忧，知道自己的行为是合法且受到保护的。
