A Critique on Decision Regarding Dismissal of Child Visitation Who Reaches Puberty

The present judgment that is criticized in this article is in line with the common idea that has been taken into consideration in the judicial precedent of most courts. In this approach, family rights and the disputes arising out of them are considered like other financial and non-financial claims. This idea emphasizes that in child visitation case, it must be seen whether the parents’ son or daughter has reached puberty or not. In cases where the child in question has reached puberty, the court considers itself free from dealing with the child visitation case,since it considers such a case to belong to the same category as other non-financial cases and therefore refuses to hear it after the child has reached puberty and holds that the child in question, even if she is a nine-year-old girl, should make his or her own decision about meeting his or her parents, and this idea can be criticized; This is so because the son or daughter who lives with one of the parents is more influenced by the opinions of the parent with whom is living than he or she is a decision-maker about his personal life and failure to consider the other parent's request deprives both the son or daughter and parent of their basic rights. Therefore, the courts should be obliged to make a decision in such cases and this should be considered necessary to protect the rights of the child and the parents. This approach would be in line with hadiths and jurisprudential views as well as human rights instruments.