Custody in Maine.

Decisions against where the child lives

Maine bundles them into one framework rather than splitting them into two labels. Under 19-A M.R.S. § 1501(5), "shared parental rights and responsibilities" means "most or all aspects of a child's welfare remain the joint responsibility and right of both parents, so that both parents retain equal parental rights and responsibilities, and both parents confer and make joint decisions regarding the child's welfare," covering education, religious upbringing, medical, dental and mental health care, travel arrangements, child care arrangements, and residence. Under § 1501(1), "allocated parental rights and responsibilities" means responsibilities "are divided between the parents, with the parent allocated a particular responsibility having the right to control that aspect of the child's welfare," and the aspects that can be divided expressly include primary physical residence, parent-child contact, support, education, medical and dental care, religious upbringing, and travel boundaries and expenses. Under § 1501(6), "sole parental rights and responsibilities" means one parent has exclusive rights as to all aspects, possibly excepting support. So in Maine, residence is itself one of the responsibilities that can be shared or allocated. Section 1653(2)(D)(1) confirms that an award of shared parental rights and responsibilities "may include either an allocation of the child's primary residential care to one parent and rights of parent-child contact to the other parent, or a sharing of the child's primary residential care by both parents."

What the judge must weigh

3. Best interest of child. The court, in making an award of parental rights and responsibilities with respect to a child, shall apply the standard of the best interest of the child. In making decisions regarding the child's residence and parent-child contact, the court shall consider as primary the safety and well-being of the child. In applying this standard, the court shall consider the following factors:

1. A. The age of the child;
2. B. The relationship of the child with the child's parents and any other persons who may significantly affect the child's welfare;
3. C. The preference of the child, if old enough to express a meaningful preference;
4. D. The duration and adequacy of the child's current living arrangements and the desirability of maintaining continuity;
5. E. The stability of any proposed living arrangements for the child;
6. F. The motivation of the parties involved and their capacities to give the child love, affection and guidance;
7. G. The child's adjustment to the child's present home, school and community;
8. H. The capacity of each parent to allow and encourage frequent and continuing contact between the child and the other parent, including physical access;
9. I. The capacity of each parent to cooperate or to learn to cooperate in child care;
10. J. Methods for assisting parental cooperation and resolving disputes and each parent's willingness to use those methods;
11. K. The effect on the child if one parent has sole authority over the child's upbringing;
12. L. The existence of domestic abuse between the parents, in the past or currently, and how that abuse affects: (1) The child emotionally; (2) The safety of the child; and (3) The other factors listed in this subsection, which must be considered in light of the presence of past or current domestic abuse;
13. M. The existence of any history of child abuse by a parent;
14. N. All other factors having a reasonable bearing on the physical and psychological well-being of the child;
15. O. A parent's prior willful misuse of the protection from abuse process in former chapter 101 or chapter 103 in order to gain tactical advantage in a proceeding involving the determination of parental rights and responsibilities of a minor child. Such willful misuse may be considered only if established by clear and convincing evidence and if it is further found by clear and convincing evidence that, in the particular circumstances of the parents and child, that willful misuse tends to show that the acting parent will in the future have a lessened ability and willingness to cooperate and work with the other parent in their shared responsibilities for the child. The court shall articulate findings of fact whenever relying upon this factor as part of its determination of a child's best interest. The voluntary dismissal of a protection from abuse petition may not, taken alone, be treated as evidence of the willful misuse of the protection from abuse process;
16. P. If the child is under one year of age, whether the child is being breast-fed;
17. Q. The existence of a parent's conviction for a sex offense or a sexually violent offense as those terms are defined in Title 34‑A, section 11203;
18. R. If there is a person residing with a parent, whether that person: (1) Has been convicted of a crime under Title 17‑A, chapter 11 or 12 or a comparable crime in another jurisdiction; (2) Has been adjudicated of a juvenile offense that, if the person had been an adult at the time of the offense, would have been a violation of Title 17‑A, chapter 11 or 12; or (3) Has been adjudicated in a proceeding, in which the person was a party, under Title 22, chapter 1071 as having committed a sexual offense; and
19. S. Whether allocation of some or all parental rights and responsibilities would best support the child's safety and well-being.

What the child wants

Considered, with no age set by statute. It is factor (C) in 19-A M.R.S. § 1653(3): "[t]he preference of the child, if old enough to express a meaningful preference." Maine deliberately declined to pick a number. A judge decides case by case whether this particular child can express a meaningful preference, and it remains one factor among nineteen.

Where there has been violence or abuse

Maine handles this with required findings and conditions rather than a flat presumption. The Legislature's finding in 19-A M.R.S. § 1653(1)(B) is that domestic abuse is "a serious crime against the individual and society, producing an unhealthy and dangerous family environment" that creates "an atmosphere that is not conducive to healthy childhood development." Section 1653(3) makes safety primary in residence and contact decisions, and factor (L) requires the court to weigh domestic abuse and to consider every other factor "in light of the presence of past or current domestic abuse." The operative rule is § 1653(6)(A): "A court may award primary residence of a minor child or parent-child contact with a minor child to a parent who has committed domestic abuse only if the court finds that contact between the parent and child is in the best interest of the child and that adequate provision for the safety of the child and the parent who is a victim of domestic abuse can be made." Section 1653(6)(B) then lists the conditions a court may impose: exchange in a protected setting; supervised contact; completion of a certified domestic abuse intervention program or other counseling as a condition of contact; abstaining from alcohol or controlled substances during contact and for 24 hours before; paying a fee to defray the cost of supervised contact; prohibiting overnight contact; and any other condition necessary for safety. Section 1653(5) also protects a parent who left the home: departure from the family residence may not be counted against a parent who was physically harmed or seriously threatened, where that harm or threat caused the departure. Section 1653(5-A) provides that although the court shall consider that a protective order was issued, it decides parental rights and contact de novo and may not use the protective order's terms as precedent.

Mediation

Yes, and this is one of Maine's most consequential rules. 19-A M.R.S. § 1653(11): "Prior to a contested hearing under this chapter relating to initial or modified orders, the court shall refer the parties to mediation as provided in chapter 3." And 19-A M.R.S. § 251(2): "Except as provided in paragraph B, prior to a contested hearing under chapter 27, chapter 29, chapter 55, chapter 61 or chapter 63 when there are minor children of the parties, the court shall refer the parties to mediation." You can be excused only "[u]pon motion supported by affidavit" and only "for extraordinary cause shown." Section 251(4) also requires the court to find that the parties "made a good faith effort to mediate" before it will hold a hearing; if it finds a party did not, the court may order more mediation, dismiss the action or part of it, enter a default judgment, assess attorney's fees and costs, or impose any other appropriate sanction. Section 251 does not contain an automatic domestic violence exemption. If domestic abuse is part of your case, raise it by motion and affidavit under the extraordinary-cause provision, and tell the mediation program in advance so safety arrangements such as separate rooms can be made.

If the court appoints someone to look into it

19-A M.R.S. § 1507 authorizes the court, in contested proceedings under §§ 904, 1653 and 1803 involving a minor child, to appoint a guardian ad litem "when the court has reason for special concern as to the welfare of a minor child," and directs the court to make the appointment as soon as possible after the case begins. In deciding whether to appoint one, the court considers the wishes of the parties, the age of the child, the nature of the proceeding including how contentious it is, the financial resources of the parties, the extent to which a guardian ad litem may assist in providing information about the child's best interest, whether the family has a history of domestic abuse, abuse of the child by one of the parties, and other factors. We could not confirm from the portion of § 1507 we read exactly how guardian ad litem fees are allocated between the parents; ask the clerk or the guardian's appointment order, because in practice Maine courts allocate the cost between the parents in the appointment order.

Changing the order

19-A M.R.S. § 1657(1) provides that an order for parental rights and responsibilities "may be modified or terminated as circumstances require," on the petition of one or both parents or on the motion of an agency or person granted rights or contact. There is no waiting period. Section 1657(2) then declares four things to be a substantial change in circumstances as a matter of law: relocation or intended relocation of the child to another state where the other parent is a Maine resident and there is a shared or allocated award; relocation or intended relocation that will disrupt parent-child contact, with more than 60 miles presumed disruptive; receipt of a § 1653(14) relocation notice; and "[a] finding by the court that domestic or family violence has occurred since the last determination of primary residence."

If you were never married

The same statute governs. 19-A M.R.S. § 1507 refers to contested proceedings under §§ 904, 1653 and 1803, and § 1803 sits in Maine's parentage law, so a never-married parent's case is decided under the same § 1653(3) best-interest factors, using the same shared, allocated, and sole framework. The practical difference is the order of operations: parentage must be established before parental rights and responsibilities can be allocated, so an unmarried father generally needs a parentage determination first. We did not separately confirm Maine's default rule on parental rights before parentage is established.