HF4660

Purpose

• This bill changes how Minnesota courts decide parenting time in divorce or legal separation cases. It aims to maximize the time a child spends with each parent while keeping the child’s safety and well-being at the center.

Key Provisions

• Presumption and best interests

  • In dissolution or legal separation cases, during the child’s minority, the court must grant parenting time upon request to protect each parent–child relationship and maximize the child’s time with both parents.
  • This creates a rebuttable presumption that it is in the best interests of the child to maximize time with each parent.
  • The court may reserve a future decision on establishing or expanding parenting time; if so, the “best interests” standard can apply to later motions.

• Safety and restrictions

  • If parenting time with a parent is likely to endanger the child’s physical, mental, or emotional health or safety, the court must restrict or deny parenting time as appropriate.
  • The court must consider the child’s age and the child’s relationship with the parent before the proceedings began.

• Support and enforcement

  • A parent’s inability to pay child support is not enough to deny parenting time.
  • The court may order a law enforcement officer or other designated person to accompany a party to enforce or comply with parenting time.

• Scheduling and forms

  • When possible, parenting time orders must include a specific schedule for regular parenting time, including holidays, vacations, and school breaks (unless time is restricted, denied, or reserved).
  • The court administrator must provide a form for pro se (self-represented) motions about parenting time disputes. The form cannot request a change of custody and must include basic instructions and a section about the parenting time expeditor process.

• Time targets and calculation

  • There is a presumption that a child should receive a substantial amount of parenting time with each parent, aiming toward 50 percent when feasible.
  • If it isn’t practicable to award 50 percent to each parent, the court should maximize time for each parent as close as possible to 50 percent.
  • Time can be calculated by counting overnights or by another method if there are significant periods when the child is in a parent’s custody but not overnight.

• Findings and compliance

  • The court must include findings about each parent’s ability to comply with the parenting time schedule.
  • If the court deviates from the 50 percent presumption, it must provide written findings supported by clear and convincing evidence for the deviation.

• Grounds for deviation from the presumption

  • Mental illness diagnosed by a licensed physician or psychologist that endangers the child’s safety.
  • A parent refusing or failing to complete a court-ordered substance use disorder assessment or chemical dependency recommendations.
  • A parent’s inability to care for the child at least 50 percent of the time because of scheduling conflicts (work, school, childcare, medical appointments, etc.) that make 50 percent impractical.
  • Other factors such as long travel distances, the child’s medical or educational needs, or concerns about the child’s safety.

• Considerations when deviating

  • The court must consider that reducing a parent’s time can hurt the parent’s ability to parent, which might negatively affect the child.

• Relationship building and gradual increase

  • If a child has not had a relationship with a parent due to the other parent’s absence for a year or more, or if the child is a very young child (1 year old or younger), the court may order a gradual increase in parenting time (for up to one year, then switch to a schedule based on the 50/50 presumption).

• Age, gender, and relationship status

  • The court may not limit parenting time based solely on the child’s age.
  • The court may not consider a parent’s gender, marital status, or relationship status when making parenting time decisions.

• Exceptions to the 50/50 norm

  • It is not considered a deviation if a parent receives up to 53 percent of parenting time and the other parent receives at least 47 percent.
  • A deviation may still occur if there has been domestic abuse, or a domestic violence-related offense between the parents or between a parent and child.

• Other factors in awarding time

  • The court will evaluate whether one parent has interfered with the child’s relationship with the other parent without justification, whether false allegations of domestic abuse have been made, and whether a parent has chronically denied or minimized the other parent’s parenting time to gain an advantage.

Significant Changes to Existing Law

• Introduces a strong presumption to maximize parenting time with each parent, subject to safety and other restrictions.
• Requires more explicit schedules and formal findings about each parent’s ability to comply.
• Expands grounds for deviating from 50/50 time to include mental health, substance use treatment, scheduling infeasibility, distance, and child-specific needs, with a requirement for written factual findings.
• Explicitly prohibits gender, marital status, or relationship status from affecting parenting time decisions.
• Creates procedural tools for self-represented parties and emphasizes early, explicit consideration of the parenting time plan (including holidays and school breaks).
• Adds protections for safety-related concerns, while clarifying that inability to pay support should not automatically restrict parenting time.

Practical Implications

• Courts may push toward more equal time with each parent, provided safety and practicality considerations are met.
• Families may need to provide more scheduling information and follow more detailed parenting time plans.
• There could be more emphasis on addressing parental cooperation and accountability, including addressing false allegations and interference with time.

Notable Concepts and Phrases from the Text

• parenting time, best interests, rebuttable presumption
• maximize time with each parent, 50 percent presumption
• schedule, holidays, vacations, school breaks
• pro se motion, court administrator form, parenting time expeditor process (518.1751)
• safety: physical, mental, emotional health; restrict or deny
• overnights, time calculation methods, significant time periods, separate days
• compliance findings, clear and convincing evidence
• deviation grounds: mental illness, substance use disorder assessment, schedule modification infeasibility
• distance, special needs, safety concerns, inability to modify schedule
• gradual increase, one year limit
• age, gender, marital status, relationship status not a factor
• exceptions to 50/50: domestic abuse, domestic violence-related offense
• unwarranted interference, false allegations of domestic abuse, chronic denial/minimizing of parenting time

Relevant Terms - parenting time - best interests - rebuttable presumption - maximize time - 50 percent presumption - overnights - significant time periods - holidays and school breaks - pro se motion - expeditor process - safety (physical/mental/emotional health) - compliance findings - mental illness - substance use disorder assessment - domestic abuse - domestic violence-related offense - unequal time - gradual increase - age considerations - gender neutrality - marital status neutrality - interference with relationship - false allegations - custody (not requested on pro se forms)