TN Parenting Plan Modification Considers Best Interests of the Child

Tennessee law case summary on custody modification in family law from the Court of Appeals.

Amanda Jane (Fillers) Crum v. Arvin Dwayne Fillers – Tennessee Custody Modification Law

This case involves a mother’s request to modify the parenting plan originally agreed upon.

Amanda Jane (Fillers) Crum, the mother, and Arvine Dwayne Fillers, the father, were married in 1996 and divorced in 2005.   They had three children.  At the time of the divorce, the parties agreed that the mother would be the primary residential parent and the father would financially support the children.  The parenting plan, however, gave each parent equal parenting time (182.5 days).

The mother filed a petition in 2010, asking for modification of the parenting plan.  She argued that there had been a change in circumstances, including father’s: refusal to pay child support; refusal to visit with the children on holidays and; use of vulgar language in front of the children,as well as his new wife’s criticism of the mother in front of the children.  The mother said the father illegally claimed the children on his tax returns, had been convicted of domestic assault twice and sometimes prohibited the children from doing homework or showering in his home.  She argued that the children’s behavior was affected by the father.  She asked for increased child support, designation as the primary residential parent (which the court noted was an error on her part, since she already had this status) and modification of the parenting plan based on a new plan she submitted with her petition.

During trial, many of the mother’s claims were confirmed and certain issues about her parenting role were also raised.   She testified that both she and the father were sometimes more flexible with the parenting plan, for example, when she allowed the children to sleep over at the father’s home.  At other times, she was more rigid with the plan if it interfered with her schedule.  She also testified that the father did not follow through on all of his visitation rights laid out in the parenting plan.  The mother admitted that both she and her husband did not have permanent jobs and that they did not have health insurance and that at times.

The trial court accepted the mother’s petition and ordered a modification in the parenting plan because it was in the children’s best interests.  The court increased the mother’s co-parenting time to 285 days, left visitations to twice a week for five hours and every other weekend and scheduled holidays, and added divided visitation in the fall, spring and summer vacations (which only the mother had previously).  The court also increased the father’s child support payments in accordance with the Tennessee Child Support Guidelines.   The father appealed.

Material Change Requires Modification of Parenting Plan

The appeals court agreed with the lower court and denied the father’s petition.   According to the law, the mother, as the parent seeking a modification in the parenting plan, must show that both a “material change” in circumstances occurred and that as a result, a modification of the plan is in the children’s best interest.    The Tennessee Supreme Court ruled that in order to determine if there was a material change, the court should consider if a change occurred after the original order when into effect, whether this change could have been reasonably known or anticipated and whether the change affects the children’s well-being in a meaningful way.   Tennessee child custody law says that there does not need to be a risk of harm to the child to show a change in circumstances but may include such factors as failure to adhere to the parenting plan and even other circumstances which require a change to do what is in the best interests of the children.   The lower court correctly considered the 16 factors listed in Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-6-404(b), but had no obligation to list which factors it considered, as argued by the father.

The court also noted that the father did not submit a parenting plan, leaving the court with only the mother’s proposed plan to use as a guide.  The appeals court held that based on the father’s behavior, there was a material change in circumstances and the best interests of the children warranted a change in the parenting plan.

No. E2011-01885-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Oct. 11, 2012).

See original opinion for exact language.  Legal citations omitted.

The Miles Mason Family Law Group handles Tennessee divorce, child support, alimony, child custody, and parent relocation.  Download our free e-Book, Your First Steps: 7 Steps Planning Your Tennessee Divorce.  A Memphis divorce lawyer from the Miles Mason Family Law Group can help.  To schedule your confidential consultation, call us today at (901) 683-1850.