Czech Child Protection Failures

Should OSPOD and court (Czech Child Protection Authorities) representatives experience institutional care themselves until they change their views? Or perhaps they should try living with an abuser?

The social and legal child protection system (OSPOD) in the Czech Republic has long faced criticism for its incompetent actions, which systematically harm children, discriminate against mothers, and destroy their natural maternal bonds.

Instead of protecting the best interests of children, it often contributes to or directly causes their psychological and physical harm, abusing its authority to manipulate and make unjust decisions. These decisions frequently contradict the wishes of the child (even in cases of children over the age of eight).

Below is a detailed overview of OSPOD's most significant failings that lead to the trauma and harm of both children and their primary caregivers (most often mothers).

The information in this article is based on the author’s personal experience, which can be substantiated with evidence, and the testimonies of women who have been harmed and are in contact with the author. The issues and failings presented here were formulated based on the author’s interactions with mothers and fathers harmed not only by OSPOD Černošice but by OSPOD offices across the Czech Republic.

OSPOD systematically ignores the needs, opinions, and wishes of children, despite the clear stipulation in the Convention on the Rights of the Child that children’s opinions must be considered. Instead, both children (and often mothers—against their will) are manipulated by OSPOD.

OSPOD workers are incapable of recognizing which children are at risk. They lack the tools to properly investigate and assess family situations. Children’s statements are either disregarded or manipulated with sophisticated questioning techniques. Documentation often fails to reflect reality.

The author has evidence proving that OSPOD workers „can write whatever they want“ in official records. (There is an audio recording where an OSPOD worker openly admits this.) They deliberately omit key information from custody proceedings, manipulate documentation for their own purposes, and include details that do not correspond to reality or benefit the child.

Children are forcibly taken into institutional care to change their opinions. Police units are often involved, and children are threatened with police action. Children are told they will remain in institutional care until they say they do not want to live at home, even if they were thriving, happy, and well-cared-for there.

This approach is used even when the caregiving parent provides a stable, beneficial environment for the child. Such extreme interventions cause lifelong trauma to the children.

OSPOD misuses state mechanisms not to protect children, but to deliberately and knowingly harm them. For example, OSPOD frequently disregards ministry guidelines, such as the manual for case conferences from the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs (MPSV), which is intended to prevent the misuse of institutional care.

Children removed from their homes and placed into institutional care experience severe consequences, including:

OSPOD claims to act „in the best interest of the child“ and „according to the law,“ yet its actions often cause significant harm to children. It blatantly disregards evidence of this harm.

The author argues that decisions in custody proceedings should not cause new trauma to children or exacerbate existing trauma. Stability in the child’s environment—where they thrive and feel secure—must not be disrupted. Functional and beneficial relationships, particularly with the primary caregiver, should be preserved and protected rather than undermined.

The principle should be:

„In custody proceedings, decisions by courts and OSPOD must not cause new trauma or deepen existing trauma in children. Stability in environments where children thrive should remain intact, and functional relationships that benefit the child—such as with the primary caregiver—should be protected.“

In any approach to a human being within a civilized society, interventions are designed to maximize benefits and prevent harm to health. The benefits must outweigh the risks and damages.

The well-being of the individual (child) takes precedence over the well-being of society. It is not permissible to harm a child in order to ensure the welfare of someone else or others.

Here, we have children, actual children (!), who are being devastated by OSPOD’s interventions to such an extent that the risks and damages far exceed any potential benefits—unprecedentedly and on an enormous scale.

Are such practices truly justifiable and tolerable any longer?

Children are often subjected to pressure to change their opinions, for instance, about their relationship with their father. Methods include:

OSPOD representatives are not hesitant to demean mothers in court. It is even claimed that mothers are at fault if their children—who want to stay with their mothers—feel distressed, wet the bed, suffer from CAN (child abuse and neglect) syndrome, or develop psychosomatic illnesses.

OSPOD frequently overlooks signs of domestic violence or dismisses them as „marital disputes.“ This neglect endangers both children and mothers, exposing them to further violence or coercion by the abusive parent. In such cases, OSPOD effectively becomes an enabler of the abuser.

By escalating conflicts between parents and involving children in these disputes, OSPOD risks harming children who would otherwise be safe and stable at home. Such interventions result in greater trauma than the separation of the parents ever would.

OSPOD often fails to address domestic violence adequately. When a parent raises this issue, they are often mocked, told it is irrelevant, or their concerns are dismissed.

In some cases, OSPOD even sides with the abusive parent, marginalizing and discriminating against the other parent (often mothers) who provide excellent care. Women in such situations are labeled as „overly emotional,“ accused of fabricating claims, or spreading false information about the abusive parent. OSPOD presents these distorted portrayals in court, often using them as a pretext to remove children from the care of a parent who has otherwise provided exemplary care.

OSPOD may go as far as to claim that the victimized parent is manipulating the children—especially if the children express a preference to live with the non-abusive parent due to the violent, erratic, or unpredictable behavior of the other.

OSPOD does not offer family therapy, nor does it encourage parents to undergo mediation to reach an agreement. If an abusive individual (regardless of gender) refuses therapy, mediation, or other resolutions, OSPOD simply lets it go unaddressed.

Instead, OSPOD frequently becomes an enabler of the abusive parent, exacerbating conflicts. This often leads to situations where OSPOD supports the abusive parent—who may have even been convicted of abuse—escalating tensions and creating a more hostile environment.

By failing to address these dynamics, OSPOD perpetuates a system where children and non-abusive parents suffer.

OSPOD claims, „We also work with abused children.“ However, it is simpler for them to excuse the abuser, advocate for joint custody or exclusive custody for the father, rather than thoroughly investigate the matter.

The problem lies in the fact that even the Police of the Czech Republic (PČR) lacks the capacity and tools to investigate such cases. They delegate the matter to OSPOD, which similarly lacks the tools or expertise to handle these situations effectively.

In Western, civilized countries, institutions are expected to exercise caution and protect victims and children from the outset, even in cases of suspicion. In the Czech Republic, however, children are entrusted to abusive, violent, or otherwise dangerous individuals—not just when abuse is suspected, but often without thorough investigation.

OSPOD simply does not have the capacity, tools, or specialists to investigate such matters. I still recall the memorable statement made by OSPOD employees: „We are not psychologists.“ Unfortunately, this sad reality must be acknowledged.

A key argument frequently used by OSPOD and even the courts is the statement: „Let’s look forward, focus on what will be, and not dwell on the past.“ This is how OSPOD and the courts commonly address victims of abuse.

In the Czech Republic, we are expected to forget what has happened and instead create, for instance, a bright and sunny future by entrusting children to abusive individuals.

Contrary to research, basic logic, and the wishes of the children themselves, OSPOD often recommends or decides on the separation of siblings, which has devastating consequences for the children. Separating siblings disrupts their sense of stability and safety.

Let’s be honest—women don’t give birth to children so they can be separated. We have children so they can grow up together, learn from one another, influence each other’s development, draw from each other’s experiences, and simply have a shared childhood.

Then along comes an OSPOD worker who insensitively and arrogantly declares (let’s call it confidence rather than use another word…) that it doesn’t matter if the children are separated.

One finding from the Ombudsman states, for instance, that „only the father was consulted.“ The father is kept informed, while the mother is not.

Children have been removed from school facilities without any communication with the mother. The father, who was convicted of assaulting the mother and endangering her life—a charming, smiling manager in a white shirt and suit—was in lively communication with OSPOD representatives. These representatives promised him that the children would change their minds and be placed in the custody of the father who was convicted of violence.

Examples from statements by mothers during our phone calls or at the Demonstration for the Protection of Children’s Rights and Mental Health in the Czech Republic:

Women are systematically discriminated against, their maternal roles, care, and natural bonds are dismissed and trampled upon. The relationship between mother and child is being destroyed, and no one seems to care about how the separation from their primary caregiver—most often the mother—affects children or how this impacts their long-term development.

Mothers are being systematically erased from their children’s lives, and OSPOD actively supports this (across the Czech Republic).

Many of us report that „preliminary measures“ are being abused. For example, a child may be temporarily placed with an abusive parent without a psychological evaluation, just to see „what happens.“

The mother (usually, although roles can be reversed) then files an appeal. Various baseless, unfounded accusations—often completely fabricated—are leveled against her (a reality reported by the vast majority of women who have contacted the author). The mother must defend herself against these false allegations, while the court file focuses not on evidence (e.g., existing rulings or proof of the other parent’s abuse) but on her responses to these manufactured accusations, which are often generated by OSPOD and other parties influenced by OSPOD’s manipulations.

Time passes, and after several months, the court decides it is uncertain and orders a psychological evaluation. This evaluation can take over a year to complete.

Months and years go by, and divorce proceedings are prolonged.

During custody proceedings, child support is often not established. Women who, prior to the proceedings, cared for their children full-time, worked part-time, or were on maternity leave naturally lack the resources to defend themselves against OSPOD’s targeted actions, pay expensive lawyers, and secure basic needs for themselves and their children.

There is no support in the Czech Republic. NONE.

While there are numerous non-profit organizations, they are completely ineffective. In many cases, these organizations even collaborate with OSPOD in destructive actions against mothers.

As a result, many women lose custody battles due to a lack of financial resources and end up handing over their children to fathers. OSPOD and the courts even use the mothers’ financial struggles—despite their previously exemplary caregiving—as an argument to place the children with working fathers. These fathers are often so overburdened that they cannot provide the same standard of care as the mothers.

Maternal care and the maternal bond are ignored or downplayed in OSPOD’s decision-making processes, despite research and scientific evidence unequivocally proving that a stable relationship with the primary caregiver (often the mother) is crucial for the healthy emotional and psychological development of a child.

OSPOD trivializes, devalues, and mocks the role of the mother in a child’s life, making decisions that systematically undermine this bond.

The author and her colleagues hold a (for some, controversial) opinion: Separating breastfed infants and children under three or four years old from their mothers for extended periods is a crime against humanity.

Mothers present relevant evidence—medical records, children’s testimonies, expert opinions, and statements from professionals—that are often logically supported and backed by recordings or final judgments of domestic violence. Yet, OSPOD frequently ignores this evidence while accepting similar evidence presented by fathers without question.

In custody proceedings, mothers who try to protect their children are often inappropriately labeled by OSPOD as problematic, abusive, threatening, mentally ill, unstable, or manipulative. This occurs even when children naturally and understandably express a desire to live with their mothers.

Instead of addressing domestic violence or the child’s actual needs, mothers often become the targets of false accusations or systematic, deliberate undermining of their caregiving abilities.

Such approaches not only violate a child’s right to a safe environment, a home, and contact with their primary caregiver (often their mother) but also erode trust in the fairness of the judicial system. The focus must be on protecting children’s rights and objectively assessing all aspects of the situation without bias against either parent.

One mother called the author, sharing that she had been imprisoned for wanting to visit her children, who had been unjustly placed in a children’s home. According to her, the children were placed there because they wanted to stay home with their mother and refused to go to their father’s house for the weekend.

This mother repeatedly contacted her children and tried to bring them back home and help them. Because of her efforts to support her children and be with them, she ended up in prison.

Will we continue to CRIMINALIZE THE MATERNAL BOND in The Czech Rep.? A bond that is natural, normal, and essential for the healthy development of children?

Testimonies from women clearly indicate that OSPOD and the courts use threats of legal incapacitation or deprivation of parental rights as a tool to achieve sole custody for fathers or shared custody arrangements. More than a dozen women have reported this to the author. Is this even possible? Yes, it is — in the Czech Republic!

Supervised contacts as a tool to destroy the bond between mother and child
Women frequently report being banned from contact with their children and/or subjected to supervised contact until the bond with the child is destroyed by the manipulative father. Such a legal situation can persist for years. If the mother attempts to approach the child, she risks imprisonment. Prohibitions on contact or supervised contact are often imposed because the child prefers to be with the mother rather than the father and wants to stay at home with the mother. Both the mother and child are punished and traumatized — even in cases where the father is abusive and the mother’s care was flawless and beyond reproach.

OSPOD often intentionally provides false information about mothers to support their arguments. This practice includes:

There have been documented cases where OSPOD has collaborated with fathers to manipulate court proceedings in the father’s favor, to the detriment of both the child and the mother (this can also happen in reverse, where mothers manipulate the system).

This includes convincing and manipulating third parties (e.g., schools, psychologists, non-profit organizations, charities, educational institutions, or care centers) to produce false reports against the mother. It may also involve illegal coercion of children to change their opinions, often through psychologists or other methods.

For example, the author has recordings of an OSPOD representative aggressively pressuring care center staff to use psychologists and psychological methods, separate siblings, and employ other tactics to force children to change their minds about which parent they want to live with.

The abuse of preliminary measures leads to prolonged proceedings. Child support for children often goes unestablished for years. Women are forced to pay lawyers for extended periods to address the consequences of OSPOD’s often misguided, illegal actions (e.g., false accusations against mothers). They do this while also striving to protect their children.

In this process, women face an overwhelming lack of support. There is no effective help in the Czech Republic.

Non-profit organizations, though numerous, are largely dysfunctional. In some cases, these organizations even collaborate with OSPOD in their destructive actions against women as mothers.

As a result, many affected women lose their cases. Financially strained, they are forced to hand their children over to fathers. OSPOD and the courts frequently use the financial situations of otherwise loving, exemplary mothers as justification to grant custody to working fathers. These fathers are often too overburdened to change their lifestyles in ways that would provide children with the same standard of care they previously received from their mothers.

The outcomes of these unfounded, illogical, and unsupported decisions—which fail to justify removing children from mothers—have severe consequences, including:

And many others.

OSPOD’s failings are not mere administrative errors; they have profound and lasting impacts on the psychological and physical well-being of children. It is imperative to reform the child protection system so that the genuine best interests of children—not formal equality or the interests of individual parents—are at the center of its decisions.

Why do these issues occur so frequently? WHY?

What would happen if mothers could focus on their children in ways that benefit them and work only part-time, as is common in other countries? This prospect likely alarms the Czech economy. What would it cost the state?

Is the current situation maintained to bolster the economy? Is it, as one politician stated, because „children aren’t voters,“ and custody proceedings do not truly consider the interests of children?

What would happen if mothers didn’t have to fight for their children to live peacefully and securely (e.g., avoiding the unnecessary need to attend two different schools)?

What punishment should a judge receive for not allowing a 9-year-old boy to live where he wants to be? A judge who fails to respect the wishes of a 9-year-old boy to stay home with his mother is acting inexcusably.

Are the high salaries of such judges truly justified? Shouldn’t these judges—like the children they harm—be confined in institutional care until they change their perspective? Or perhaps they should be sentenced to live with an abusive partner, isolated from their family and friends…

We sincerely thank everyone who has come forward to share their experiences of being harmed by OSPOD Černošice or other OSPOD offices. Your courage in sharing your stories is invaluable—not only in raising awareness but also in advocating for systemic change.

We thank those willing to join the criminal complaint against OSPOD Černošice. Together, we can shed light on the injustices and failures negatively impacting the lives of children and families.

We kindly ask the family, friends, or acquaintances of the person who tragically passed away with their child in the Krkonoše mountains at the end of 2022 to contact the author of this article at 774 848 814.

We encourage those harmed by OSPOD Černošice and wishing to join the criminal complaint against OSPOD Černošice to contact +420 774 848 814.

Petition for the Protection of the Rights and Mental Health of Czech Children: Petition for the Protection of the Rights and Mental Health of Czech Children.

Request for Financial Support (for producing a documentary on systematically abused children and publishing cases):

Transparent Account: 5512612003/0800