What to Do When Your Co-Parent Obstructs the PC Process

Nov 04, 2025·By Cori McGuire

When Parenting Coordination Is Obstructed: Authority, Limits, and the Role of the Court

One of the most difficult and frustrating experiences for parents in Parenting Coordination arises when one parent appears uncooperative, dismissive, or openly resistant to the process. Obstruction can take many forms: failing to respond, refusing to provide information, re‑litigating resolved issues, declining to follow agreed protocols, refusal to pay Parenting Coordination fees, or attempting to derail the process altogether.

In high‑conflict cases, this behaviour is not incidental. It is often the very reason Parenting Coordination was ordered. Understanding what Parenting Coordination can—and cannot—do in these circumstances is essential.

Recent Court Guidance on the Parenting Coordinator Role

Courts in British Columbia have recently provided clearer guidance on the scope and limits of the Parenting Coordinator role. That guidance emphasizes that Parenting Coordination is a post‑order, implementation‑focused process; that a PC’s authority arises solely from the wording of the appointing court order or written agreement; and that PCs do not exercise coercive enforcement powers or broad best‑interests jurisdiction.

This article reflects that clarified role and explains how Parenting Coordination functions when one parent obstructs the process.

The Legal Foundation of Parenting Coordination in British Columbia

In British Columbia, Parenting Coordinators are not informal facilitators. Where appointed by court order, a PC’s authority is derived from:

• the Family Law Act and Family Law Act Regulation;

• the specific wording of the court order or written agreement of appointment; and

• any procedural terms incorporated by reference to the extent they are consistent with, and do not exceed, the authority granted by the order.

A Parenting Coordinator may make binding determinations only where expressly authorized by the order or agreement, and only for the purpose of implementing existing parenting arrangements—not varying them or granting new remedies.

These authorities are practical tools designed to allow Parenting Coordination to function in high‑conflict families. They are not open‑ended powers.

What Parenting Coordination Is Designed to Do

Parenting Coordination is designed to manage implementation, not to compel cooperation or resolve underlying relational conflict.

Within the scope of the appointment order, a PC may:

• establish clear, written protocols for communication, information‑sharing, scheduling, and logistics;

• facilitate resolution of recurring implementation disputes;

• make binding determinations on authorized issues when parents reach impasse;

• require the use of structured tools (such as shared calendars or communication platforms) where permitted;

• allocate make‑up parenting time where authorized; and

• apportion Parenting Coordination fees as permitted by the order.

These functions exist because high‑conflict parents often struggle to implement orders without external structure. Parenting Coordination supplies process—not enforcement.

Obstruction Within the Parenting Coordination Process

When one parent obstructs the process, the issue is not merely interpersonal. It becomes a structural problem affecting the viability of the Parenting Coordination model itself.

Within Parenting Coordination, obstruction may be addressed by:

• identifying and documenting patterns of non‑participation or resistance;

• clarifying expectations set out in the court order and Parenting Coordination agreement;

• making binding determinations within jurisdiction when agreement cannot be reached;

• narrowing issues to implementation outcomes rather than adult grievances; and

• recording when the process is undermined by persistent refusal to engage or comply.

Parenting Coordinators do not initiate court proceedings or enforce orders, but their work often creates the factual record necessary for the court to understand how the process has functioned in practice.

The Limits of the Role — Without Minimizing It

Parenting Coordination is not a court. A PC does not exercise contempt powers, impose sanctions, or compel compliance in the way a judge can.

This does not make the role minimal. It means the role is bounded.

Recent cases underscore the importance of distinguishing between:

• implementation and management of parenting arrangements, which is the core of Parenting Coordination; and

• coercive enforcement or substantive judicial remedies, which remain exclusively within the court’s authority.

This distinction does not weaken Parenting Coordination. It clarifies when responsibility must properly return to the court.

When Parenting Coordination Is No Longer Effective

In some cases, despite structured protocols and available determinations, Parenting Coordination becomes non‑viable. This most often occurs where one parent persistently:

• refuses to participate in the process required by the order;

• ignores determinations;

• withholds information or authorizations necessary for implementation;

• refuses to pay required fees; or

• attempts to force the PC into an enforcement role.

Recognizing this point is not a failure of Parenting Coordination. It is a jurisdictional assessment that the process can no longer operate as intended within its authorized limits.

At that stage, the appropriate response is documentation and clarity, allowing the court to determine what additional authority or structure—if any—is required.

Keeping the Focus Where It Belongs

High‑conflict dynamics are often driven by fear, control, and unresolved loss. Parenting Coordination does not resolve those dynamics. It manages their impact on children by creating clear systems that reduce opportunities for conflict.

When those systems are persistently undermined, a different level of judicial oversight may be required.

Parenting Coordination is one tool among many. Used appropriately, it can significantly reduce conflict and improve daily functioning. When it is obstructed beyond repair, the next steps belong with the court—not with the Parenting Coordinator.

Written by Cori McGuire, a PC since 2008 and family law lawyer since 1998 in British Columbia. Cori has many other articles on the parenting coordination process including: How PCs Manage Conflict, When a Co-operation Stops, When PC Agreements are Ignored and Secret Recordings. Further reading by subject is found in our Resource Library.