Minnesota Statute 518.175 is the state’s parenting time law. It presumes each parent should have at least 25 percent of parenting time with the child, sets the standards courts use to modify or restrict a schedule, controls when a parent can move a child out of state, and gives the parent who has been denied court-ordered time a specific set of remedies, from makeup time and attorney fees up to a $500 fine and transfer of custody.
What the 25 Percent Presumption Means
The statute starts from a rebuttable presumption that each parent is entitled to receive at least 25 percent of parenting time.1Minnesota Office of the Revisor of Statutes. Minnesota Code 518.175 – Parenting Time That works out to roughly 91 overnights a year. In most families it looks like every other weekend plus a midweek evening, but the exact schedule depends on the household.
Overnights are the default way to count parenting time. The statute allows courts to use other time equivalents when overnights do not fit the family, which matters for a parent working a night shift who spends substantial daytime hours with the child. The child’s age factors into whether a particular block of time qualifies.
Because the 25 percent floor is a presumption, a judge can go above or below it when evidence supports a different schedule. Distance between homes, the school calendar, and the child’s age all come into play. The written order is supposed to be detailed enough to prevent future arguments: specific exchange times, specific pick-up and drop-off locations, and a spelled-out holiday rotation.
Modifying a Parenting Time Schedule
Subdivision 5 lays out two different standards depending on what kind of change a parent is asking for.
For a modification that does not change the child’s primary residence, the court applies a best interests standard. The statute specifically says that a child’s changing developmental needs are a valid reason to adjust the schedule.1Minnesota Office of the Revisor of Statutes. Minnesota Code 518.175 – Parenting Time A plan built for a toddler often does not fit a teenager with jobs and extracurriculars, and the court can update it.
Restricting a parent’s time is harder. The court can only impose a restriction after finding that parenting time is likely to endanger the child’s physical or emotional health, impair the child’s emotional development, or that the parent has chronically and unreasonably failed to follow the existing schedule.
One important nuance sits inside the modification rules. A change that brings a parent’s time to somewhere between 45.1 and 54.9 percent is not considered a restriction of the other parent’s time, even though it mathematically reduces that parent’s share. The legislature drew that line so a move toward roughly equal time is not treated as a punishment to the parent who had more.
If a parent alleges the current schedule puts the parent or child in danger, the court must hold a hearing as early as possible and can order supervised exchanges or restrict parenting time while the situation is evaluated.
Supervised and Restricted Parenting Time
When a child’s safety is in question, the court can require supervision or deny parenting time outright, but the bar is high. After a hearing, the court must find that parenting time is likely to endanger the child’s physical, mental, or emotional health or safety, or impair the child’s emotional development. General concerns do not meet that standard. The parent asking for restrictions needs specific evidence, such as untreated substance abuse, documented domestic violence, or neglect.
Supervised parenting time is the usual middle ground. A neutral third party or a professional facility monitors the parent’s time with the child instead of contact being cut off. If an order for protection is already in place against the parent, the court must consider it when setting the arrangement and may require an independent, neutral exchange location.
Minnesota’s state court administrator has developed standards that supervisors are expected to meet, and either parent can challenge the appropriateness of a particular supervisor the court chooses. Judges often require the restricted parent to complete specific steps before loosening restrictions, such as a chemical dependency evaluation, completion of a treatment program, or an anger management course.
Moving the Child Out of State
Relocation is one of the most contested areas of the statute, and the rule is clear: a custodial parent cannot move the child to another state without the other parent’s written consent or a court order.1Minnesota Office of the Revisor of Statutes. Minnesota Code 518.175 – Parenting Time If the court finds the purpose of the move is to interfere with the other parent’s parenting time, it denies the request.
When interference is not the motive, the court weighs eight factors:
- The quality of the child’s relationship with each parent, siblings, and other significant people in the child’s life.
- The age, developmental stage, needs, and likely effect of the move on the child, including any special needs.
- The feasibility of preserving the other parent’s relationship through a workable long-distance schedule, considering logistics and finances.
- The child’s preference, based on age and maturity.
- Whether the parent seeking the move has a pattern of promoting or undermining the child’s relationship with the other parent.
- Whether the move will enhance the general quality of life for both the parent and the child, including employment and educational opportunities.
- The reasons each parent has for seeking or opposing the move.
- The effect of any domestic abuse on the safety analysis.
The parent asking to move carries the burden of proof. The burden shifts to the parent opposing the move if the moving parent has been the victim of domestic abuse by the other parent. A cross-country move can turn a near-equal schedule into a summer-and-holidays arrangement, which is why courts take these motions seriously.
Remedies When Parenting Time Is Denied
Subdivision 6 gives a layered set of remedies when one parent blocks the other from exercising court-ordered time. The most common is compensatory parenting time: the court orders additional time to replace what was lost. Compensatory time must be at least the same type and duration as the time that was denied and must be taken within one year, at a time acceptable to the parent who was shut out.1Minnesota Office of the Revisor of Statutes. Minnesota Code 518.175 – Parenting Time A lost weekend gets a weekend back. The court can also order more time than was denied.
If the interference is repeated and intentional, the consequences escalate. The interfering parent must reimburse the other parent’s costs and attorney fees if the court finds they have the ability to pay. Beyond reimbursement, the court can:
- Impose a civil penalty of up to $500 payable to the other parent.
- Transfer custody to the parent whose time was denied.
- Order any other remedy the court finds to be in the child’s best interests.
After a second finding of repeated and intentional interference, the court is required to impose at least one of those additional sanctions rather than merely consider them. Proof of unwarranted denial can also constitute contempt of court and may be sufficient cause to reverse custody.
The $500 figure is a statutory cap, not a starting point. In practice, the bigger financial exposure is reimbursing the other side’s attorney fees, which routinely runs well above $500.
Parenting Time Expeditors
Minnesota offers a dispute-resolution route that avoids a full court hearing. Under Section 518.1751, either parent can ask the court to appoint a parenting time expeditor: a neutral third party who first tries to mediate an agreement and, failing that, issues a binding decision.2Minnesota Office of the Revisor of Statutes. Minnesota Code 518.1751 – Parenting Time Expeditor
Expeditors handle disputes about interpreting or enforcing the existing order, situations the order does not specifically address, and claims that one parent is not using their scheduled time. The parties can agree on an expeditor jointly, or the court will pick one from a roster maintained by the court administrator.
An expeditor can be appointed for a single dispute or on an ongoing basis. For families with chronic disagreements about holidays, swap requests, or exchange times, an ongoing appointment can be cheaper and faster than repeated court motions. Expeditor decisions carry the same enforcement weight as the Subdivision 6 remedies, so compensatory time and cost reimbursement are available through that process.
Virtual Parenting Time
The statute specifically allows virtual parenting time: phone calls, video conferencing, email, and other electronic contact at reasonable hours and durations. Courts can build it into a new order or add it to an existing one.1Minnesota Office of the Revisor of Statutes. Minnesota Code 518.175 – Parenting Time If the parents disagree about whether the necessary equipment is reasonably available, the court decides based on the child’s best interests and each parent’s ability to pay for any additional costs.
The key limit: virtual time can only supplement in-person parenting time, never replace it. A court cannot cut a parent’s physical schedule and fill the gap with video calls. The point comes up often in relocation cases, where a moving parent may suggest video contact to offset the loss of in-person time.
What the Statute Does Not Give You
Two practical limits are worth knowing. First, calling the police when the other parent refuses to turn over the child usually will not force an exchange. Officers focus on keeping the situation calm; parenting time disputes are generally civil, not criminal, and unless the order specifically authorizes law enforcement assistance at exchanges, officers will typically document the incident and send you back to court. That record is still useful evidence for a later enforcement motion, so the call is worth making.
Second, the statute enforces the written order, not informal arrangements. Verbal agreements to swap weekends or skip exchanges feel cooperative when the relationship is working, but they create disputes once it is not. Every deviation from the written schedule that is not confirmed in writing is a potential enforcement problem later. If both parents want a change, put it in writing or ask the court to modify the order.