750 ILCS 5/602.7: The 17 Parenting Time Best-Interest Factors

Under 750 ILCS 5/602.7, Illinois judges allocate parenting time by applying 17 best-interest factors listed in subsection (b), limiting what parental conduct they consider under subsection (c), and allowing substitute visitation for deployed military parents under subsection (d). No single factor decides the case. The judge weighs all of them against the evidence each parent presents and can consider anything else relevant to the specific family.

The 17 Best-Interest Factors in Section 602.7(b)

The statute reframed the older “custody and visitation” question as how to divide a child’s time between two homes in a way that serves the child. When a judge sits down to design a parenting schedule, these are the 17 items the law tells them to work through:

Each parent’s wishes about the schedule and the reasons behind them.
The child’s wishes, given appropriate weight based on the child’s maturity and ability to express a reasoned preference.
The amount of time each parent spent performing caretaking functions during the 24 months before the case was filed, or since birth if the child is under two.
Any prior agreement or course of conduct between the parents about caretaking.
The child’s relationships with parents, siblings, and any other significant person in the household.
The child’s adjustment to home, school, and community.
The mental and physical health of everyone involved.
The child’s specific needs.
The distance between the parents’ residences, the cost and difficulty of transportation, each parent’s daily schedule, and the ability to cooperate on the arrangement.
Whether a restriction on parenting time is appropriate.
Physical violence or threat of physical violence directed against the child or a member of the child’s household.
Each parent’s willingness and ability to place the child’s needs ahead of their own.
Each parent’s willingness and ability to facilitate and encourage a close relationship between the child and the other parent.
Any abuse against the child or another member of the household.
Whether one of the parents is a convicted sex offender or lives with one, including the nature of the offense and any completed treatment.
The terms of a parent’s military family-care plan if that parent is a member of the U.S. Armed Forces facing deployment.
Any other factor the court expressly finds to be relevant.

The list is deliberately open-ended. Factor 17 lets the judge fold in anything specific to this family that the first sixteen don’t quite capture, but the court has to say on the record what that factor is and why it matters.¹

Which Factors Tend to Carry the Most Weight

The 17 factors are equal on paper. In practice, a few of them do a lot of the work.

Caretaking History (Factor 3)

Factor 3 tends to matter more than parents expect. Judges look at who was actually getting the child ready for school, attending medical appointments, and handling bedtime routines during the two years before the petition. A parent who was largely uninvolved during the marriage will have a harder time arguing for equal time after separation, even if their intentions have changed. The statute anchors this factor to a defined window (24 months, or since birth for very young children), so evidence about who did what during that period is directly on point.¹

The Safety Cluster (Factors 10, 11, 14, and 15)

Factors 10, 11, 14, and 15 all deal with safety. When a parent raises allegations of violence, abuse, or a household member with a sex-offense history, the court takes them seriously and may order investigations, protective measures, or supervised parenting time. If one parent is a convicted sex offender, both sides are entitled to a full hearing on the issue, and the statute directs the court to consider the nature of the offense and any treatment completed.¹

Willingness to Support the Other Parent (Factor 13)

Factor 13 asks whether each parent will actively encourage the child’s relationship with the other parent, or undermine it. This is where judges pay attention to whether a parent bad-mouths the other in front of the child, blocks phone calls, or interferes with scheduled time. A parent who wants more time but appears unwilling to support the child’s relationship with the other parent gives the court a reason to be cautious.

The Child’s Wishes (Factor 2)

Older children who can articulate a reasoned preference carry more weight than very young children. The statute doesn’t set a magic age. It ties the weight to maturity and the child’s ability to explain the reasoning behind the preference, which means a thoughtful twelve-year-old may be heard more than a seven-year-old who just wants whichever house has fewer rules.

What the Court Cannot Consider: Section 602.7(c)

Section 602.7(c) contains a rule that surprises many parents. The court cannot consider a parent’s conduct unless that conduct directly affects their relationship with the child. Marital misconduct, infidelity, and financial disputes between the spouses are generally off-limits when the judge is deciding parenting time. The question is always whether the behavior affects the child, not whether it makes one parent look bad.¹

The gray area is where conduct clearly touches the child. Substance abuse affects the child. A new dating relationship, by itself, probably does not. But if the new partner has a history of violence or is a convicted sex offender, that becomes relevant under the best-interest factors and can be raised. The practical takeaway is to focus your evidence on how the other parent’s behavior affects your child, not on how it made you feel as a spouse.

Substitute Visitation for Deployed Parents: Section 602.7(d)

Section 602.7(d) addresses a narrow situation. When a parent is deployed or has deployment orders, the court can allow that parent to designate someone the child already knows to exercise parenting time on their behalf. The court applies the same best-interest factors to the proposed substitute and will approve the arrangement only if it benefits the child. This prevents a deployed parent from losing all contact by proxy during a long absence.¹

How the Factors Get Applied

Section 602.7 tells the court what to weigh. The mechanics of getting there sit in a companion statute, 750 ILCS 5/602.10. Both parents must file a proposed parenting plan within 120 days after the petition is served or after the respondent files an appearance. Parents can file a joint plan if they agree, or separate plans if they do not. The court can extend the deadline for good cause.²

If neither parent files a plan, the court must hold an evidentiary hearing and allocate parental responsibilities on its own. Missing the 120-day window puts you at a disadvantage because the judge may read the failure as a lack of engagement with the child’s future.

When Parents Cannot Agree

If the parents’ proposed plans conflict, the court must order mediation unless it finds mediation would be inappropriate, such as in cases involving domestic violence. If mediation fails, the court holds an evidentiary hearing, evaluates each parent’s proposal against the 602.7(b) factors, and issues its own order.²

A joint plan is binding on the court unless the judge finds, after reviewing the circumstances and evidence, that the agreement does not serve the child well. If the court rejects a proposed plan as inconsistent with the child’s best interest, it must explain its reasoning on the record. That explanation almost always traces back through the same 17 factors, which is why parents who understand the factors before they sit down to draft a plan tend to end up with proposals a judge can approve.

Presenting Evidence on the Factors

Because the factors are the framework the judge is required to use, the strongest cases are the ones where each parent’s evidence lines up factor by factor. School records, medical records, calendars, photos, texts, and third-party witnesses all get organized around specific factors rather than presented as a general narrative of the marriage. Evidence that doesn’t connect to a factor and doesn’t affect the child, however emotionally charged, may be excluded under subsection (c).

The court can also appoint a guardian ad litem or child representative in contested cases to investigate and report on how the factors apply to this particular child. Their recommendations aren’t binding, but they are often influential because they come from someone whose job is to evaluate the same factors the judge must apply.³

1
Illinois General Assembly. Illinois Compiled Statutes 750 ILCS 5/602.7 – Allocation of Parental Responsibilities: Parenting Time
2
Illinois General Assembly. Illinois Compiled Statutes 750 ILCS 5/602.10 – Parenting Plan
3
Illinois Legal Aid Online. Child Representatives, Guardians ad Litem (GAL), and Attorneys for a Child