How to modify child custody and parenting time in Rhode Island

Sources last checked 8 November 2026. Information only, not legal advice. Rhode Island’s statute on custody and visitation, R.I. Gen. Laws 15-5-16, does not state the general test for changing a custody order. This page therefore rests on what we read: the text of section 15-5-16, as published by the Rhode Island General Assembly, and two Rhode Island Supreme Court decisions that state the test the Family Court applies, Souza v. Souza (2019) and, as a second source, Vicente v. Vicente (2008). Rhode Island’s statute says “visitation” for time with the child. Read what we could not confirm below.

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

The short version

In Rhode Island the person asking to change custody or placement has to show two things. In Souza the court, quoting earlier decisions, said the moving party must show “by a fair preponderance of the evidence” that the circumstances at the time of the original decree have so changed that the decree should be modified in the interest of the child’s welfare, and, as the court restated the test, that the change of placement is in the children’s best interests. The court called this a “stringent evidentiary standard”: if you do not meet it, “the prior custody decision should remain intact”. The statute adds a few specific rules, including that proven domestic violence since the last order is a prima facie change of circumstances. For changing child support or spousal support, see modifying child support and spousal support in Rhode Island.

The test courts apply: Souza v. Souza (R.I. 2019)

Moving party’s burden. The trial justice in Souza said it was the moving party’s burden to show by a preponderance of the evidence that circumstances had so changed that custody should be modified in the child’s welfare, and added that the best interest of the child must be considered. The Supreme Court restated the same two-part test.
Substantial change. The father lost because he failed to show a “substantial change in circumstances”. The Supreme Court upheld the denial, noting the trial justice found no evidence the children “would be better off” with him.
Best interests must be addressed. The trial justice had gone further and switched the parents from joint to sole custody for the mother because they could not co-parent. The Supreme Court vacated that part: awarding sole custody that way “goes a step too far” because it was done without reference to the children’s best interests.
Practical point. A breakdown in co-parenting is not by itself enough for the court to change the arrangement. Plan to prove the change of circumstances and why the new arrangement serves the child.

A second decision: Vicente v. Vicente (R.I. 2008)

Same test, older case. In this short order the Supreme Court said a parent pressing a motion for a change of custody or placement must show “by a fair preponderance of the evidence” that conditions at the time of the original decree have so changed that it should be modified for the child’s welfare. It called this a “stringent evidentiary standard”.
If you fall short. Unless the movant meets that standard, “the prior custody decision should remain intact”.
Review is deferential. On appeal the court reviews the “denial of a motion to modify a prior custody award” only for abuse of discretion, and will not disturb the hearing justice’s findings unless they are clearly wrong.
What happened. A mother asked to move her daughter’s placement from the father mainly because he had been prosecuted. The charge was dismissed. The Supreme Court affirmed the denial because she “failed to meet her burden” of showing a change in circumstances. The facts of one case, not a rule for every case.

What the statute adds, 15-5-16

Visitation and compliance, (d)(1). The court shall provide for the reasonable right of visitation by the parent without custody, except on a showing of cause. If the court twice finds noncompliance with its visitation order, the court shall treat that as “grounds for a change of custody to the noncustodial parent”.
Domestic violence, (g)(5). In a proceeding to modify custody or visitation, a finding that domestic or family violence has occurred since the last custody determination “constitutes a prima facie finding of a change of circumstances”.
Safety first, (g)(2). Where a court has found domestic or family violence, it must consider “as primary the safety and well-being of the child” and of the victim parent, and it may attach conditions such as a batterer’s intervention program or supervised exchanges.
Moving because of violence, (g)(6). A parent’s absence or relocation because of the other parent’s domestic violence shall not weigh against that parent.
Military service, (g)(7). A party’s absence, relocation or failure to comply with orders “shall not, by itself” justify modifying custody or visitation if the reason is activation to military service or deployment out of state.
Abuse findings, (d)(3). A judicial finding that a parent physically or sexually abused the child is sufficient cause to deny visitation; the court must then review the case at least annually.
Public assistance, (d)(2). The fact that a parent receives public assistance shall not be a factor in awarding custody.

Changing parenting time

Same family court, same motion. Section 15-5-16 does not set out a separate, lighter test for changing visitation. Souza concerned custody and placement, and we did not read a Rhode Island decision on visitation-only changes, so do not assume a schedule change is easier.
Detail the schedule. If a court finds an order has not been complied with, the statute directs it to define the noncustodial parent’s visitation “in detail”.

Forms and filing

Statewide form. We did not read a Rhode Island Family Court form or packet for a custody modification motion. Plan on a written motion filed in the Family Court that entered your order, with notice to the other parent.
Where to ask. The Family Court clerk can tell you about local forms, rules and fees. See child custody in Rhode Island.

What we could not confirm

Source of the test. The change-of-circumstances and best-interests test comes from case law, not from section 15-5-16. We read two Supreme Court decisions, Souza (2019) and Vicente (2008, a short order), and the cases they quote. We did not read those earlier cases directly, and we did not check for any Rhode Island decision after 2019.
Relocation. We did not find or read a Rhode Island statute on one parent moving with the child, and we did not read case law, so we cannot say how a move is treated.
Best-interest factors. We did not confirm a statutory list of factors for custody.
Visitation-only changes. We did not confirm whether a different standard governs a change to parenting time alone.
Other law. We did not read the Family Court rules, the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act sections, the guardian ad litem rules, or the child support modification statute.
Forms, fees and procedure. We did not confirm a statewide form, filing fees, fee waivers or any waiting period.
Statute currency. The copy of 15-5-16 we read lists amendments through 2013. We did not check for later changes.

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