What is the difference between a contempt motion and a motion to change for enforcing a parenting order?

These two tools serve different purposes, even though both can come up when a parenting order isn't working as intended. A contempt motion asks the court to find that someone deliberately disobeyed a clear existing order, and it's aimed at addressing and remedying a past breach, potentially with consequences for the parent who broke the order. A motion to change, by contrast, asks the court to vary the terms of an existing order going forward, typically because circumstances have changed or the existing arrangement genuinely isn't workable, rather than focusing on punishing a past violation.

In practice, these can overlap: a parent frustrated by repeated denied parenting time might consider a contempt motion to address the breaches themselves, while also considering a motion to change if the schedule itself needs adjusting because it no longer fits the family's circumstances. Choosing the right tool, or both, depends on whether the real problem is that the current order is being ignored, or that the order itself needs updating. Because bringing the wrong motion can waste time and resources, getting legal advice on which approach, or combination, fits the actual problem is worthwhile before filing anything.