{"id":3368,"date":"2023-01-09T14:44:00","date_gmt":"2023-01-09T21:44:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/scoresbyfamilylaw.com\/blog\/?p=3368"},"modified":"2023-01-18T15:56:33","modified_gmt":"2023-01-18T22:56:33","slug":"grandparent-visitation-2023-update","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/scoresbyfamilylaw.com\/blog\/2023\/01\/09\/grandparent-visitation-2023-update\/","title":{"rendered":"GRANDPARENT VISITATION: 2023 UPDATE"},"content":{"rendered":"

This is an update to a post I first wrote in 2016 and which I updated in 2019.\u00a0 The original post and 2019 update appear below.<\/p>\n

The Arizona Court of Appeals has again issued a published opinion addressing grandparent visitation rights in Arizona.\u00a0 Borja grandparent visitation case<\/a>.\u00a0 In its opinion, published December 20, 2022, the Court of Appeals vacated the trial court’s grandparent visitation order and sent the case back to the trial court to craft a new visitation order which was “minimally intrusive” on the mother’s parental rights.<\/p>\n

In the initial grandparent visitation case, the trial court awarded broad visitation rights to the paternal grandparents.\u00a0 The paternal grandparents were awarded 51 visitation days per year.\u00a0 They were also awarded visitation time on every major holiday and were given the right to choose when<\/em> they would exercise their visitation time.\u00a0 The trial court even ordered the mother to notify the paternal grandparents about the children’s activities in advance.\u00a0 The Court of Appeals held that awarding such broad rights to the grandparents violated the requirement that grandparent visitation be “minimally intrusive” and that the trial court’s order violated mother’s constitutional rights to parent her children.<\/p>\n

While the Court of Appeals upheld the trial court’s decision to award\u00a0some<\/em> visitation to the grandparents, it appeared to do so primarily because the mother and father disagreed about whether grandparent visitation should be ordered, and courts are required to give “special weight” to what\u00a0both<\/em> legal parents believe is in the children’s best interests.\u00a0 Because the parents in the Borja<\/em> case disagreed (mother did not want a formal visitation order for grandparents, but father believed that awarding some grandparent visitation would be good for the children), the Court found that “the parents’ conflicting opinions must give way to the Court’s finding on whether visitation is in the child’s best interests.”<\/p>\n

This language implies that when a mother and father agree there should not<\/em> be a grandparent visitation order, a court should not intrude and substitute its own judgment for that of the parents.\u00a0 When legal parents agree that that grandparents should not receive visitation rights, the grandparents’ request will usually fail.<\/p>\n

The\u00a0Borja <\/em>case reinforces my previously-held opinion about grandparents’ using the court process to seek visitation rights.\u00a0 \u00a0Most grandparent visitation cases will not succeed, especially when both legal parents oppose any formal grandparent visitation order.\u00a0 In the rare event that grandparent visitation is<\/em> ordered by a court, the amount of visitation awarded will usually be minimal.\u00a0 In most cases, the better approach for grandparents is to “mend the fences” and pursue a relationship with their grandchildren without invoking the court process.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

2016 POST AND 2019 UPDATE FOLLOW:<\/strong><\/p>\n

I am regularly asked by my grandparent clients whether they can seek court-ordered visitation with their grandchildren.\u00a0 In most cases, the answer is \u201cyes, you can.\u201d\u00a0 But whether grandparents should <\/em>seek court-ordered visitation is another matter entirely.<\/p>\n

A.R.S. \u00a725-409(C) allows the court to award a grandparent visitation with a grandchild when the court finds that the visitation would be in the child\u2019s best interests and<\/em> that one<\/em> of the following is true:<\/p>\n