Purpose

This bill changes Minnesota's custody and parenting-time rules to update how the courts decide what is in a child’s best interests. It adds a strong default preference for joint custody, but keeps safety protections if there has been domestic abuse. It also emphasizes gender-neutral decisions, requires detailed court findings, and encourages cooperation to reduce parental conflict.

Key Provisions

• Best interests framework

  • The court must evaluate 12 factors when deciding custody and parenting time, including:
  • The child’s physical, emotional, cultural, spiritual, and other needs and how proposed arrangements affect development.
  • Any special medical, mental health, developmental, disability, or educational needs requiring special parenting or services.
  • The child’s reasonable preference if the child is old enough and capable of expressing it.
  • Whether domestic abuse as defined in 518B.01 has occurred, and the nature and implications for the child’s safety and development.
  • Any health issues of a parent affecting the child’s safety or development.
  • Each parent’s history and ongoing participation in caregiving.
  • The parents’ ability to provide ongoing care and meet the child’s needs and maintain consistency.
  • Effects on the child from changes to home, school, or community.
  • How arrangements would affect the child’s relationships with each parent, siblings, and other important people.
  • The overall benefit to the child of maximum time with both parents, and the detriment of restricting time with either parent.
  • Each parent’s willingness and ability to support the child’s relationship with the other parent and to encourage ongoing contact.
  • Parents’ willingness to cooperate, share information, minimize conflict, and use dispute-resolution methods for major decisions.

• Detailed findings and interrelation of factors

  • Courts must make detailed findings on each factor and explain how the evidence leads to custody decisions.
  • No single factor can be used to exclude all others; factors may influence one another.

• Joint custody presumption

  • There is a rebuttable presumption that joint legal custody and joint physical custody is in the child’s best interests when requested by either parent.
  • The presumption can be rebutted if domestic abuse occurred between the parents. In that case, the court must consider the nature and context of the abuse and how it affects the child’s safety, wellbeing, and development.

• Gender neutrality and parental capability

  • The court must not prefer a parent solely because of gender.
  • Both parents are presumed capable of forming and sustaining nurturing relationships with the child, though there may be substantial reasons to decide otherwise.

• Time sharing not required to be equal

  • Joint custody does not require an absolutely equal division of time between the parents.

• Special rules for service members

  • In custody cases involving a service member’s child, the court may not rely only on past deployment or possible future deployment when deciding the child’s best interests.

• Disability and other considerations

  • Disability alone (as defined by relevant statute) shall not be the sole factor in deciding custody.
  • The court may consider violations of protective or related laws (e.g., 609.507) as part of the best interests analysis.

What This Bill Seeks to Change

• Moves toward more joint custody by default, promoting parenting involvement from both parents.
• Requires courts to provide explicit, factor-by-factor reasoning for custody decisions.
• Strengthens safety protections by giving domestic abuse a central role in rebutting joint custody.
• Keeps decisions flexible by recognizing many valid ways parents can meet a child’s needs and by avoiding automatic time-equality requirements.
• Ensures decisions are made without gender bias and with attention to each parent’s ability to support the child’s relationship with the other parent.
• Applies special considerations to service members to avoid relying solely on deployment history.

Potential Implications

• For families without domestic abuse, more cases may start with joint custody as the default.
• In families with domestic abuse, the safety and development of the child will be weighed more heavily, and joint custody may be limited.
• Judges will need to document detailed reasoning for each factor, which could affect the length and complexity of cases.
• Emphasis on cooperation and conflict resolution could push families toward better communication and formal dispute-resolution planning.

Relevant Terms - Best interests of the child - Custody - Parenting time - Joint legal custody - Joint physical custody - Rebuttable presumption - Domestic abuse (518B.01) - Safety, wellbeing, and developmental needs - 609.507 (relevant law) - Service members - 518E.102 (related custody provisions) - Disability (as a factor) - Cooperation, minimizing parental conflict, dispute resolution - Caregiving history and ongoing participation - Child’s preferences - Home, school, community changes - Nurturing relationships - Non-gender-based determinations