Ah, well then, that will vary by the case and the judge hearing, right? I’ve provided one instance in which the judge did hold the parent in contempt, and was upheld by the Ohio Court of Appeals. I can pretty much guarantee that it is not unique. As I said earlier, there is no guarantee a judge would hold the parent in contempt, but the fact that the parent did violate the order does make contempt a risk for the parent, just as with any other violation of the court orders. You made it sound, up until now, as though the parent would not violate the order, i.e. would be legally justified in refusing to let the grandparents take the kids such that the court could not impose contempt. That may not have been what you intended, but it is how your posts came across to me (and I think to others as well). So I welcome your clarification of your position.
I wouldn't counsel any client to violate a court order, regardless of whether I thought the judge would actually hit the client with contempt on the first time the other parent takes it to court. Even if the judge decides to not impose contempt sanctions, that violation will stick in the judge’s mind and may come back to bite the client later. I do not see the violation here as morally superior than any other violation of the court’s orders (though perhaps you do). I would instead advise the client to bring her own motion to the court to address the grandparent issue. In the states I practice, at least, that would be less likely to put the client in a bad light than violating the order and then having to rely on the judge’s mercy to avoid contempt.