HF3840 (Legislative Session 94 (2025-2026))

Custody and parenting time presumptions modified.

Related bill: SF4343

AI Generated Summary

Purpose

This bill changes how Minnesota courts decide custody and parenting time. It aims to strengthen a focus on keeping the child connected with both parents, set out clearer factors for judges to consider, and address issues like domestic abuse, health needs, and deployment by service members.

Main provisions and goals

  • Default presumption in favor of joint custody
    • The bill creates a rebuttable presumption that joint legal and joint physical custody are in the child’s best interests when requested by either parent.
    • If domestic abuse has occurred, the presumption can be rebutted, and the court will weigh the abuse in deciding custody.
    • There is no automatic guarantee of equal time with each parent; joint custody does not require an absolutely equal share of parenting time.
  • Clear and detailed factors for the “best interests” test
    • The court must evaluate 12 factors, including:
    • The child’s physical, emotional, cultural, spiritual, and other needs.
    • Any special medical, mental health, developmental, or educational needs.
    • The child’s reasonable preferences if the child is sufficiently mature.
    • Whether domestic abuse has occurred, and its nature and impact on the child.
    • Each parent’s health and how it affects the child.
    • Each parent’s history and ongoing involvement in the child’s care.
    • Each parent’s ability to provide ongoing, stable care and meet the child’s needs.
    • How changes to home, school, or community affect the child.
    • The effect on the child’s relationships with the other parent, siblings, and others.
    • The child’s benefit from maximum time with both parents and potential detriment from limiting time.
    • Each parent’s willingness to support the child’s relationship with the other parent and to minimize conflict.
    • The parents’ ability to cooperate in rearing the child and resolve major decisions.
  • Thorough findings required
    • Courts must make detailed findings on each factor and explain how the evidence supports the custody decision.
    • Courts must consider that different families and cultures meet a child’s needs in different ways.
  • Gender neutrality and disability
    • The court must not favor a parent based solely on gender.
    • Disability alone (whether for the parent or child) cannot automatically determine custody.
    • Evidence of non-child-related violations (e.g., certain crimes) can be considered if they affect the child.
  • Domestic abuse and safety
    • The presumption in favor of joint custody can be rebutted if there has been domestic abuse, with careful consideration of the abuse’s nature and impact on the child’s safety and development.
  • Service members and deployment
    • In cases involving a service member’s custody, the court may not rely only on past or possible future deployment when determining the child’s best interests.

Significant changes to existing law

  • Shifts to a default joint custody framework, with a strong emphasis on keeping both parents engaged in the child’s life.
  • Adds a formal, detailed list of factors that must guide custody decisions, rather than leaving decisions to broad discretion.
  • Introduces required, explicit findings for each factor to improve transparency.
  • Strengthens protections around domestic abuse by making it a key factor that can rebut the joint custody presumption.
  • Reinforces gender neutrality and recognizes multiple pathways to meet a child’s needs rather than relying on traditional or gender-based assumptions.
  • Includes specific considerations related to the health, development, and service member deployments to ensure fair handling of those situations.

Practical impact (what this could mean for families)

  • Courts will more often consider joint custody as the starting point, unless there is domestic abuse or other compelling reasons.
  • Parents may need to provide more detailed information about each factor during custody proceedings.
  • Decisions may reflect a broader view of what “family” means, including cultural and developmental needs.
  • Parenting plans may focus more on cooperation and clear communication to minimize conflict and support the child’s relationship with both parents.

Relevant Terms - best interests of the child - custody - parenting time - joint legal custody - joint physical custody - domestic abuse (domestic violence) - rebuttable presumption - gender neutrality - disability - child development - safety and wellbeing - cooperation in rearing - parental conflict - service member deployment - home/school/community stability - continued relationship with both parents - detailed findings - factors for best interests of the child - influence on siblings and other significant persons

Bill text versions

Actions

DateChamberWhereTypeNameCommittee Name
March 02, 2026HouseActionIntroduction and first reading, referred toJudiciary Finance and Civil Law
March 12, 2026HouseActionAuthor added

Citations

 
[
  {
    "analysis": {
      "added": [
        "Explicitly enumerates and emphasizes multiple factors to consider in the best interests analysis, including the child's physical, emotional, cultural, spiritual, and other needs; and any special medical, mental health, developmental disability, or educational needs that may require special arrangements or services.",
        "Highlights the reasonable preference of the child if the child is deemed capable of expressing a reliable preference.",
        "Emphasizes the impact of domestic abuse on parenting and the child's safety and development.",
        "Establishes a rebuttable presumption of joint legal and physical custody, with exceptions if domestic abuse has occurred.",
        "Requires the court to make detailed findings on each factor and explain how each factor influenced the custody and parenting time determination.",
        "Affirms that the court should not favor one parent over the other based solely on the parent's gender, and recognizes that there are multiple valid ways to respond to a child's needs."
      ],
      "removed": [],
      "summary": "This bill amends Minnesota Statutes 2024 section 518.17, subdivision 1, to revise the best interests of the child standard used in custody and parenting time determinations. It adds detailed factors, reinforces a joint custody presumption, and clarifies protections related to domestic abuse.",
      "modified": [
        "Reframes and clarifies the best interests factors to be considered as a set of interrelated criteria, with explicit guidance on how to weigh them in custody decisions.",
        "Adds a robust framework for joint custody presumption and domestic abuse considerations, and strengthens factual findings requirements."
      ]
    },
    "citation": "518.17",
    "subdivision": "subdivision 1"
  },
  {
    "analysis": {
      "added": [],
      "removed": [],
      "summary": "References Minnesota Statutes 2024 section 518.175, subdivision 1 (and potentially related subdivisions) in connection with the custody and parenting time framework. The excerpt provided does not include the text of the amendments to this section.",
      "modified": []
    },
    "citation": "518.175",
    "subdivision": "subdivision 1"
  },
  {
    "analysis": {
      "added": [],
      "removed": [],
      "summary": "The bill references the definition of domestic abuse as defined in Minnesota Statutes section 518B.01 for purposes of the custody and parenting time framework.",
      "modified": []
    },
    "citation": "518B.01",
    "subdivision": ""
  },
  {
    "analysis": {
      "added": [
        "Adds consideration of violations of §609.507 as a factor in the best interests analysis."
      ],
      "removed": [],
      "summary": "The bill notes that evidence of a violation of Minnesota Statutes section 609.507 may be considered in determining the best interests of the child.",
      "modified": []
    },
    "citation": "609.507",
    "subdivision": ""
  },
  {
    "analysis": {
      "added": [
        "Clarifies that disability alone shall not be dispositive of custody decisions."
      ],
      "removed": [],
      "summary": "The bill references disability-related provisions, including the principle that disability alone, as defined in 363A.03, shall not be determinative of custody.",
      "modified": []
    },
    "citation": "363A.03",
    "subdivision": ""
  },
  {
    "analysis": {
      "added": [
        "Uses the meaning of custodial responsibility as defined in 518E.102, paragraph f."
      ],
      "removed": [],
      "summary": "The bill cross-references custodial responsibility as defined in Minnesota Statutes 518E.102, paragraph (f).",
      "modified": []
    },
    "citation": "518E.102",
    "subdivision": "paragraph f"
  }
]

Progress through the legislative process

17%
In Committee
Loading…