Is it considered disobedience (عقوق) for a mother to encourage her children to defy their father’s command to return, and must the children obey the father or the mother, and is it permissible for the father to withhold financial support (نفقة) from them as a deterrent for their disobedience?

As for the ruling on a father's obedience to his children when the mother travels, this depends on who has the right of custody. If the mother travels with the intention of relocation, her custody is forfeited, and custody then belongs to the father. In this case, the children must obey him, and if they disobey him, they are considered disobedient (aqq). Some scholars, however, considered the best interest of the child (maḥḍūn) in this matter, as Ibn al-Qayyim stated that the correct approach is to consider and be cautious about what is most beneficial and advantageous for the child. This applies if the children are still within the age of custody. As for an adult, there is no custody over them, and they are free to move wherever they wish.

Regarding the maintenance (nafaqah) of children, it is obligatory for the father as long as they are young and have no wealth. This is a matter of consensus among jurists. However, if they are poor adults and capable of earning a living, the majority of jurists do not obligate maintenance for them. In the event that maintenance is obligatory, the father is not permitted to withhold support from them as a punishment. Rather, he should spend on them, considering it charity and a bond, and perhaps that will encourage them to show filial piety and obedience.