The California Supreme Court has granted review of Butler v. Harris, where the Court of Appeals held that grandparents could obtain visitation over the objection of a fit parent if they could prove by clear and convincing evidence that the parent’s refusal to allow visitation would be detrimental to the child. This case has the potential to reshape the balance between grandparents’ visitation requests and parents’ constitutional rights. Updates on this case will be closely monitored.
The typical vision brought to mind when hearing familiar lyrics about family gatherings is of an intact household—mom, dad, and children traveling to visit grandparents for holiday dinners. However, children of divorce may not share such experiences. They may divide time between multiple sets of grandparents, or in some cases, may not see grandparents at all unless legal action is pursued.
This reality underscores why states have enacted statutes to address when and how grandparents may obtain visitation with grandchildren, especially when family structures are fractured due to divorce, remarriage, separation, or parental absence.
All states have statutes that authorize courts to award visitation to grandparents under specific conditions. The scope of these laws varies significantly:
California permits grandparents to request visitation in the following ways:
California requires two findings before granting visitation rights:
If these conditions are met, courts must balance the child’s interest in maintaining that relationship against the parents’ constitutional right to make decisions regarding child-rearing. Family Code § 3103(a)(2) codifies this balancing test.
To begin, a grandparent files a petition in the family court of the child’s county of residence. The petition must outline the relationship with the child, the reasons for seeking visitation, and evidence of an existing bond. Parents are formally served, and the court may order mediation before holding a hearing.
Courts typically require grandparents to prove:
The burden is significant, particularly after Troxel v. Granville, which raised the constitutional threshold for overriding a fit parent’s decisions.
If a visitation order is granted, it has the same weight as a custody order. Violations can result in contempt proceedings, fines, or modifications of the parenting plan.
If one parent is deceased or incarcerated, courts are more likely to consider petitions from grandparents as a way to preserve continuity in the child’s life.
Grandparents’ rights may be limited after adoption, particularly by non-relatives, unless the adoption decree preserves those rights. When step-parents adopt a child, courts sometimes allow grandparent visitation to continue if in the child’s best interests.
Older children may express preferences regarding visitation. Courts can consider these views depending on the child’s age and maturity.
Virginia’s broader statute permits grandparents to seek visitation even in intact families. The Virginia Supreme Court in Williams v. Williams upheld the law, concluding that it would be constitutional if visitation were ordered only when harm to the child would result from denial.
Illinois law restricts visitation to non-intact families. In West v. West (1998) 689 N.E.2d 1215, the Illinois Supreme Court upheld this restriction, rejecting an equal protection challenge.
The debate over grandparents’ rights reflects a tension between:
Social science research suggests that children often benefit from relationships with grandparents, particularly in single-parent households. However, courts remain cautious about undermining parental authority without compelling evidence of harm.
Not in intact families. Visitation is only possible if statutory exceptions apply, or if the parents are divorced, separated, or one parent is absent.
Custody involves decision-making and residential rights, while visitation provides a scheduled time with the child without altering parental authority.
It can be challenging. Grandparents must prove both an existing bond and that denying their visitation would harm the child, while overcoming the presumption that parents act in the child’s best interest.
In most cases, adoption severes grandparents’ rights, unless specifically preserved in the adoption order or if the adoption is by a step-parent.
Navigating grandparents’ visitation rights requires understanding complex statutes, constitutional principles, and case law. Each situation depends on unique facts: the child’s relationship with the grandparent, the parents’ wishes, and the court’s view of the child’s best interests.
If you are a parent or grandparent facing a visitation dispute, professional legal advice can help you protect your family’s future. The experienced family law attorneys at Reape Rickett have decades of experience handling complex custody and visitation matters throughout California. Our team is committed to guiding clients through every step of the process, from filing petitions to responding to court actions, while always keeping the child’s best interests at the center.
To take the first step toward clarity and resolution, contact Reape Rickett today to schedule a confidential consultation. With knowledgeable representation and a compassionate approach, we can help you safeguard your parental or grandparental rights and work toward the best possible outcome for your family.
