How to modify child custody and parenting time in Idaho

Sources last checked 8 November 2026. Information only, not legal advice. This page rests on the text of Idaho Code sections 32-717 (custody of children, best interest) and 32-717B (joint custody), as published by the Idaho Legislature. The statutes do not state what you must show to change an existing order. That test comes from Idaho Supreme Court decisions, which we read in three cases: Woods v. Woods (2018) through CourtListener, and Brownson v. Allen (2000) and Stroud v. Stanger (2022, Court of Appeals) through Hall Approved, a free case-law mirror.

Idaho divorce kit Child custody in Idaho Modifying child support and alimony in Idaho After your divorce: changing a support or custody order

The short version

What the statutes confirm is limited. In a divorce action the court may give direction on custody, care and education “before and after judgment”, as seems necessary or proper in the children’s best interests, and it considers “all relevant factors”. One statute, written for military service, refers to a “substantial or material and permanent change in circumstance” as the way a custody order is modified, which suggests that is the working threshold. No Idaho statute we read states that test as a rule for everyone, but the Idaho Supreme Court has: a material, permanent and substantial change in conditions comes first, and only then does the court ask what is in the child’s best interests. For support, see modifying child support and alimony in Idaho.

What the statute confirms, section 32-717

Orders after judgment. The court may give direction on custody, care and education “before and after judgment” as seems necessary or proper in the children’s best interests.
The listed factors. The court considers “all relevant factors which may include” seven listed ones: (a) the parents’ wishes; (b) the child’s wishes; (c) the child’s interaction with parents and siblings; (d) the child’s adjustment to home, school and community; (e) the character and circumstances of everyone involved; (f) the need for continuity and stability; and (g) domestic violence as defined in section 39-6303, whether or not in the child’s presence.
Grandparents. If the child actually lives with a grandparent in a stable relationship, the court may give the grandparent the same standing as a parent when weighing custody arrangements.
Military service. Subsection (6) says active duty called by the Idaho national guard, or federal active service of a reservist, “shall not be a substantial or material and permanent change in circumstance” to reduce previously decreed custody and visitation.

Joint custody, section 32-717B

The presumption. Unless the evidence shows otherwise, “there shall be a presumption” that joint custody is in the child’s best interests.
The exception. There is a presumption that joint custody is not in the child’s best interests if the court finds one parent is a habitual perpetrator of domestic violence as defined in section 39-6303.
If the court says no. If it declines to enter joint custody, the court must state its reasons in its decision.
What counts as joint. Joint physical custody means each parent has significant periods of time with the child. Joint legal custody means the parents share decision-making on health, education and general welfare. The actual time with each parent is set by the court.

The test, from Woods v. Woods (Idaho 2018)

In Woods v. Woods, 422 P.3d 1110, the Idaho Supreme Court affirmed a magistrate who refused to change a rotating custody schedule, finding no “substantial, permanent, or material changes”. Quoting earlier decisions, it said whether a “material, permanent and substantial change in conditions” exists is “a preliminary question” to what change would be in the child’s best interests.

Two steps. First show a substantial, material and permanent change. Only then does the court decide what custody arrangement is best for the child.
Materiality depends on the child. The court said “the materiality of any particular change depends upon the effects” of that change on the children.
Parental conflict can count. The court noted it has before affirmed a custody modification based on animosity between parents that prevented the communication needed to co-parent.
Limits of what we read. We read this opinion through CourtListener. We did not read the older decisions it quotes, or how Idaho courts handle a change in a joint custody schedule.

Two more decisions, same test

Brownson v. Allen (Idaho 2000). The Supreme Court said “The party seeking modification has the burden of justifying a change in custody”. It added that “the threshold question” is whether a permanent and substantial change has occurred, while “the paramount concern is the best interest of the child”.
A child’s wish is not enough alone. Brownson notes that an earlier decision found it an abuse of discretion to change custody “solely upon the child’s desire” to live with one parent. The change was upheld there because the trial court also relied on the boy’s falling grades and because he “became anxiety-ridden” living with the other parent.
Stroud v. Stanger (Idaho Court of Appeals 2022). The court restated that a magistrate may modify custody only when a “material, substantial, and permanent change of circumstances” shows modification is in the child’s best interests, citing Woods. In that case the magistrate found a change in the mother’s “sobriety, stability, and consistent visitation” since the earlier order.

What we could not confirm

The test, beyond Woods. Sections 32-717 and 32-717B do not state what a parent must show to modify custody. We rely on Woods (2018), Brownson (2000) and Stroud (2022) for that test. We read the last two on a case-law mirror, not an official court site, and we did not check for decisions after 2022.
Other statutes. We did not read the rest of Chapter 7, the jurisdiction statutes that decide which state hears a case, or Idaho’s relocation provisions, if any.
Filing. We did not read Idaho Rules of Family Law Procedure, any court form or instruction for a motion to modify, any fee, or which magistrate court hears your case.
Statute currency. The Legislature notes that statutes are updated on the website each July 1 after the session. The history lines show amendments through 2007 for these two sections, and we did not check later session laws.

Spot something out of date? See our corrections or email hello@thecusp.app.