Maximizing Parent Participation Means More than 66 Days Parenting Time

Tennessee child custody case summary on maximizing parenting time in divorce.

Sarah Nichole Neveau v. Adam Paul Neveau

The mother and father in this Tennessee case were married in 2011, and their daughter was born the same year.  During the marriage, they resided with the mother’s adopted parents in Loudon County.  After the daughter was born, the mother served as the primary caretaker, as the father was at work or at school.  The mother suffered from post-partum depression, and she testified that this condition was made worse by the father’s verbal abuse.

The parties moved for a short time to the father’s home in Illinois, but after a few weeks, the mother filed for divorce in Tennessee.

In 2013, the court awarded the parties equal parenting time, with the father having two weeks of visitation each month.  The father remained in Illinois, and the mother claimed that the father was stubborn when it came to working together on parenting issues.

In 2014, the trial court entered a divorce, and named the mother the primary residential parent.  The mother was awarded 299 days of parenting time, with the father receiving 66 days.  The father appealed to the Tennessee Court of Appeals.

On appeal, the father argued that the trial court had improperly named the mother the primary residential parent, and that he also should have been awarded more parenting time.

The appeals court first noted that the trial court’s findings are presumed to be correct, unless the evidence preponderates against them.  The court first extensively reviewed the trial court’s findings as to the primary parent designation, and concluded that the trial court had acted properly in naming the mother primary residential parent.  Therefore, it affirmed that portion of the lower court’s ruling.

The father fared better, however, when it came to his argument concerning the amount of parenting time he had been awarded.  The appeals court noted that parenting plans should permit each parent to enjoy the maximum participation possible.  In this case, the father argued that 66 days did not allow him to maximize his participation in his daughter’s life.  He pointed out, for example, that he should have been awarded parenting time during spring break and alternating long weekends.

The following quotes are from the opinion:

Tennessee Code Annotated section 36–6–106(a) provides in pertinent part:

In taking into account the child’s best interest, the court shall order a custody arrangement that permits both parents to enjoy the maximum participation possible in the life of the child consistent with the factors set out in subdivisions (a)(1)—(10), the location of the residences of the parents, the child’s need for stability and all other relevant factors.

In determining which parenting arrangement was in the best interest of Anna, the trial court engaged in a “comparative fitness analysis.” (Emphasis added.)

….

Father next challenges the parenting plan adopted by the trial court. Tennessee Code Annotated section 36–6–106(a) provides that, taking into account a child’s best interest, the trial court shall adopt a parenting plan that permits each parent to enjoy the maximum participation possible in the child’s life that is consistent with the factors set forth in the statute. The relationship between the child and each parent should be fostered because of the fundamental importance of the parent-child relationship to the welfare of the child. Tenn. Code Ann. § 36–6–106(a). (Emphasis added.)

….

We find that the evidence preponderates against a parenting plan that limits Father’s parenting time to only 66 days a year. The prior period of equal parenting time allowed Anna to develop a closer relationship with her Father and Paternal Grandmother. During that period, the Child also engaged in extracurricular activities in Illinois, such as sports, Girl Scouts, and dance, which Father and Paternal Grandmother described as an important part of the Child’s life. We conclude that the evidence preponderates in favor of a parenting plan that does not so greatly minimize the parenting time of Father. Accordingly, we reverse the determination concerning the parenting plan and remand that issue for the trial court to adopt a plan that increases Father’s time with the Child.

The appeals court agreed with the father, and found that the 66 day plan did not allow the daughter to develop a close relationship with her father and paternal grandmother.  It pointed out, for example, that the daughter had participated in activities in Illinois such as dance and Girl Scouts, and that these had become impossible under the new plan.

For this reason, the Court of Appeals rejected the trial court’s plan, and sent the case back for a plan which increased the father’s time with the child.

After addressing other issues, the Court of Appeals affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded the case.

No. E2015-02221-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. June 7, 2017).

See original opinion for exact language.  Legal citations omitted.

See also Tennessee Parenting Plans and Child Support Worksheets: Building a Constructive Future for Your Family featuring examples of parenting plans and child support worksheets from real cases available on Amazon.com.