Mom Made Non-Emergency Medical Appointments, Held in Contempt

Tennessee case summary on custody in divorce.

Mother made non-emergency medical decisions for child and is held in contempt.

Matthew Adam Corenswet v. Samantha Marie Corenswet (Rain)

The parents in this Davidson County, Tennessee, case were divorced in 2021.  Th  permanent parenting plan for their two children named the father the primary residential parent, with each parent having custody on a “week to week” basis.  The plan gave the father decision making power over non-emergency healthcare matters.

In November of that year, one of the children was sent to the emergency room from school after passing out in PE class.  The mother accompanied the child, and the child was referred to see a GI doctor for a follow-up.  The doctor’s office called, and the mother claimed that she did not make the appointment at the time.  She instead informed them that she had to contact the father by e-mail.  She e-mailed him, but she did not respond.  When the doctor called again, she made the follow-up appointment.

She later took the child to an urgent care clinic, which scheduled a follow-up appointment with a urologist.

The father filed a petition for criminal contempt for alleged violations of the parenting plan, calling them non-emergency medical appointments.  He also claimed contempt for her refusal to take the children to martial arts classes, over which he also had decision-making authority.  After a hearing, the trial court found the mother guilty with respect to the gastroenterologist appointment,  the clinic visit, and the urologist appointment.

The mother was sentenced to two days in jail, but this was later suspended pending appeal.  The mother filed an appeal to the Tennessee Court of Appeals.

The mother first argued that her violations were not willful.  But the court viewed the issue normally, and stated that the only issue was whether she had the specific intent to schedule the medical appointments.  It pointed out that even though her motives might have been good, it was still a clear violation of the order.

On one of the counts, the mother argued that her actions were proper, because the father consented in writing to her taking the child to the appointment.  But the appeals court pointed out that her contempt was in making the appointment in the first place.

With respect to the clinic visit, the mother argued that this was a case of an emergency, and that the father had control of only non-emergency decisions.  The mother noted that the child was in severe pain the night before, and still in some pain the day of the visit.

But the appeals court pointed out that emergency medical care means immediate medical attention, and the order required the parent to immediately notify the other parent.  Since this did not happen, the appeals court affirmed the finding of contempt.

The mother did have some success on appeal.  The lower court had made some modifications to the permanent parenting plan, despite the fact that neither party had made a request for modification.  The appeals court held that the trial court was without jurisdiction to make this change, and reversed it.

The father also made a request for attorney’s fees on appeal, but this was denied.    The appeals court remanded the case for enforcement of the contempt judgment.

No. M2023-00642-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Feb. 7, 2024).

See original opinion for exact language.  Legal citations omitted.

To learn more, see Child Custody Laws in Tennessee and our video, How is child custody determined in Tennessee?