How to modify child custody and parenting time in Minnesota

Sources last checked 7 November 2026. Information only, not legal advice. This page rests on the 2026 Minnesota Statutes sections 518.18 (modification of order), 518.175 (parenting time) and 518.17 (custody and best interests), as published by the Office of the Revisor of Statutes on revisor.mn.gov. Minnesota’s statutes say “parenting time” and “parenting plan”. Read what we could not confirm below.

Minnesota divorce kit Child custody in Minnesota Modifying child support and spousal maintenance in Minnesota After your divorce: changing a support or custody order

The short version

Minnesota has two tracks. To change custody or the parent the child lives with most of the time, section 518.18(d) forbids modification unless the court finds “a change has occurred in the circumstances of the child or the parties” and that “the modification is necessary to serve the best interests of the child”. Even then, the court keeps the existing arrangement unless one of five listed exceptions applies, such as both parties agreeing or the child’s present environment endangering the child. Changes to a parenting time schedule that do not change the child’s primary residence get a lighter test under section 518.175, subdivision 5: whether the change “would serve the best interests of the child”. For changing child support or maintenance instead, see modifying child support and spousal maintenance in Minnesota.

Timing limits, section 518.18(a) to (c)

First year. Unless the parties agree in writing, no motion to modify a custody order or parenting plan may be made “earlier than one year after the date of the entry of a decree” of dissolution or legal separation that deals with custody.
Repeat motions. After a motion for modification has been heard, whether or not it was granted, no later motion may be filed “within two years after disposition of the prior motion” unless the parties agree in writing.
Exceptions. Neither limit stops a motion if the court finds “persistent and willful denial or interference with parenting time”, or has reason to believe the child’s present environment “may endanger the child’s physical or emotional health or impair the child’s emotional development”.

Changing custody or primary residence, section 518.18(d) and (e)

The facts must be new. The change must rest on facts, including “unwarranted denial of, or interference with, a duly established parenting time schedule”, that “have arisen since the prior order” or “were unknown to the court at the time of the prior order”.
Default: keep what is in place. The court “shall retain the custody arrangement” or the primary-residence provision from the prior order unless an exception applies.
The five exceptions. (i) The parties earlier agreed, in a writing a court approved, to apply the best interests standard of section 518.17 or 257.025, with conditions for agreements approved on or after 28 April 2000; (ii) “both parties agree to the modification”; (iii) the child has been “integrated into the family of the petitioner with the consent of the other party”; (iv) the child’s present environment endangers the child’s health or development and the harm likely from a change is outweighed by the advantage of a change to the child; or (v) the court denied the primary custodial parent’s request to move the child to another state and that parent moved anyway.
Joint custody orders. The same standards apply to a prior joint custody order unless the parties agree in writing to a different standard or the party asking is seeking permission to move the child’s residence to another state.
Child support meanwhile. If a parent with sole physical custody has the child living with the other parent and the court or a court-appointed referee approved temporary sole physical custody, the court “may suspend the obligor’s child support obligation” pending the final decision. A refusal must come with a written explanation.

Changing parenting time, section 518.175

Best interests, subdivision 5(b). If modification would serve the child’s best interests, the court “shall modify” the decision-making provisions of a parenting plan or an order granting or denying parenting time, provided the change “would not change the child’s primary residence”. Best interests include the child’s changing developmental needs.
Overnights must be countable, 5(a). If a plan or order cannot be used to determine each parent’s overnights or overnight equivalents, the court shall modify it so that they can be determined.
Restricting time, 5(c). The court may not restrict parenting time unless it finds parenting time is “likely to endanger the child’s physical or emotional health” or impair emotional development, or the parent has “chronically and unreasonably failed to comply with court-ordered parenting time”. Raising a parent’s time to “between 45.1 to 54.9 percent parenting time” is not a restriction of the other parent’s time.
Safety allegations, 5(d). If a parent makes specific allegations that the other parent’s parenting time puts the parent or child in danger, the court “shall hold a hearing at the earliest possible time”. It may require a third party to supervise or may restrict time to protect the other parent or child.
The 25 percent presumption, subdivision 1(g). In the absence of other evidence, there is a rebuttable presumption that a child gets “at least 25 percent of the parenting time with each parent”.
Moving to another state, subdivision 3. The parent the child lives with may not move the child’s residence to another state without a court order or the other parent’s consent. The court applies a best interests test with eight listed factors, and the “burden of proof is upon the parent requesting to move” unless that parent is a victim of domestic abuse by the other parent.
Make-up time, subdivision 6. If a parent intentionally made a substantial amount of court-ordered parenting time unavailable, the court must fully consider compensatory parenting time, which must be “taken within one year after the deprived parenting time”.

How the court decides: best interests, section 518.17

Twelve factors. The court must consider all relevant factors, including the child’s needs and development; special medical, mental health or educational needs; the child’s reasonable preference if mature enough; domestic abuse; a parent’s health issues affecting the child; each parent’s history of providing care; each parent’s willingness and ability to provide ongoing care; the effect of changes to home, school and community; the effect on relationships with each parent, siblings and others; the benefit of maximizing parenting time with both parents; each parent’s disposition to support the child’s relationship with the other (except where domestic abuse has occurred); and the parents’ ability to cooperate.
Findings. The court “must make detailed findings on each of the factors”. It may not use one factor to the exclusion of all others.
Joint custody. There is “no presumption for or against joint physical custody”, and joint physical custody “does not require an absolutely equal division of time”. There is a rebuttable presumption in favor of joint legal custody on request of either or both parties, and a rebuttable presumption against joint legal or physical custody if domestic abuse has occurred between the parents.
No gender preference. The court “must not prefer one parent over the other” solely on the basis of gender, and disability alone is not determinative of custody.
Service members. A court “may not consider only a parent’s past deployment or possible future deployment” in deciding best interests.

Forms and filing

Pro se parenting time form. Section 518.175, subdivision 1(f) requires the court administrator to provide a form for a pro se motion about parenting time disputes with relief requested and an affidavit of facts. The form “may not include a request for a change of custody”, so a custody change needs a different motion. We did not read the form itself.
Where to file. We could not confirm which court or county handles your motion. Ask the court administrator in the county that holds your case.

What we could not confirm

Case law. We read no Minnesota court decision, so we cannot say how judges apply the endangerment exception, what a party must show to get a hearing, or how courts treat an agreement to use the best interests standard.
Court forms, fees and procedure. The Minnesota court system’s website showed our automated tools a browser check, so we did not read it or bypass it. We read no motion form, affidavit requirement, filing fee, fee waiver or hearing rule.
Parenting time expeditor. Section 518.175 refers to the parenting time expeditor process in section 518.1751. We did not read that section.
Other sections. Section 518.18 refers to section 631.52, which we did not read. We also did not read the rest of section 518.17, including the parenting plan and decision-making provisions, or the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act.
Statute currency. We read the 2026 Minnesota Statutes as published on revisor.mn.gov on 7 November 2026. We did not check session laws for later changes.
Parts we summarized. The twelve best interests factors and the eight relocation factors are summarized in part. Read the statute for the exact wording.

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