The courts no longer automatically favor one parent or assume traditional custody arrangements work for every family. Instead, judges increasingly rely on psychological evaluations, parenting assessments, and evidence-based factors to determine what truly serves children’s best interests. What worked in custody cases five years ago may no longer apply.

For parents navigating custody disputes, knowing these changes isn’t optional–it’s essential. The decisions made now, the evaluations you undergo, and how you present your case will shape not just legal custody but your children’s emotional wellbeing and your family’s future dynamics.

Understanding Utah’s Custody Law Changes

Q: What are the biggest recent changes to Utah custody law?

A: Utah now emphasizes 50/50 custody as the starting presumption when both parents are fit. The state requires detailed parenting plans addressing everything from holiday schedules to decision-making authority. New laws mandate considering children’s emotional and developmental needs, not just practical logistics. Courts must now consider evidence of domestic violence more heavily, and psychological evaluations carry more weight than ever in contested cases.

Q: What is Utah’s “minimum parent-time” schedule?

A: Utah Code 30-3-35 establishes minimum parent-time for non-custodial parents: alternating weekends, one evening per week, alternating holidays, and extended summer time. However, courts increasingly exceed these minimums, recognizing children benefit from substantial time with both parents. Utah courts report 60% of recent cases result in more than minimum parent-time, with many approaching equal time.

Q: How do judges actually decide custody in Utah?

A: Judges consider multiple factors: each parent’s capacity to provide stability, historical caretaking roles, children’s relationships with each parent, work schedules, proximity of homes, any history of abuse or neglect, and children’s preferences (if age-appropriate). Increasingly, judges order custody evaluations to assess these factors professionally. Utah courts rely heavily on professional evaluations in contested cases.

Q: What’s a custody evaluation and when is it required?

A: A custody evaluation is a comprehensive assessment by a mental health professional examining family dynamics, parenting capacity, and children’s needs. It includes interviews, observations, psychological testing, and home visits. Utah courts order evaluations in high-conflict cases, allegations of abuse, concerns about mental health or substance abuse, or when parents can’t agree on arrangements. Evaluations typically cost $3,000-$8,000 and take 2-4 months.

Q: Can I refuse a custody evaluation?

A: If court-ordered, refusal can result in contempt charges and negative custody implications. Judges interpret refusal as having something to hide. However, you can request a different evaluator if you have valid concerns about bias or qualifications. You can also seek your own evaluation, though courts give more weight to court-appointed evaluators. Cooperation, even when uncomfortable, demonstrates putting children’s interests first.

Q: What do custody evaluators look for?

A: Evaluators assess emotional bonds between children and parents, each parent’s mental health and stability, parenting skills and knowledge of child development, ability to support children’s relationship with other parent, work schedules and flexibility, home environment safety and appropriateness, and any concerning behaviors or risk factors. They’re particularly alert to coaching children, parental alienation, and attempts to manipulate the evaluation.

Q: How much do children’s preferences matter in Utah?

A: Utah law doesn’t specify an age when children can choose, but judges typically consider preferences of children 14+ more seriously. Younger children’s wishes may be considered but carry less weight. However, evaluators look for authentic preferences versus coaching or pressure. Courts recognize children often say what they think parents want to hear. Utah judges emphasize that children’s “best interests” may differ from their stated preferences.

Q: What is “parental alienation” and how seriously do Utah courts take it?

A: Parental alienation involves one parent systematically damaging children’s relationship with the other parent through negative comments, restricting contact, or creating loyalty conflicts. Utah courts increasingly recognize alienation as emotional abuse. Proven alienation can result in custody changes, supervised visitation, or required therapy. However, false allegations of alienation are also problematic. Professional evaluation distinguishes alienation from justified estrangement.

Q: How do Utah courts handle 50/50 custody practically?

A: Common schedules include 2-2-5-5 (two days with each parent, alternating five-day periods), week on/week off for older children, or 3-4-4-3 splits. Courts consider children’s ages, school locations, parent work schedules, and distance between homes. Success requires parents living relatively close and communicating effectively. Utah courts report better outcomes with detailed schedules addressing all contingencies.

Q: What about relocating with children after divorce?

A: Utah requires 60-day advance notice to relocate more than 150 miles. The non-moving parent can petition to prevent relocation. Courts balance the relocating parent’s reasons against impact on children’s relationship with non-moving parent. Job opportunities or remarriage alone rarely justify relocation if it substantially impairs the other parent’s relationship. Recent Utah cases increasingly deny relocation requests that disrupt established custody arrangements.

Q: How does domestic violence affect custody decisions?

A: Utah law presumes it’s not in children’s best interests for an abusive parent to have custody. However, “abuse” must be proven with evidence–police reports, protective orders, medical records, or witness testimony. Courts may order supervised visitation, required treatment, or graduated reunification plans. False allegations backfire severely. Psychological evaluations help determine genuine safety concerns versus strategic allegations.

Q: Can custody orders be modified?

A: Utah requires showing “substantial material change in circumstances” not foreseeable at original order. Examples include parent relocation, remarriage affecting children, substance abuse relapse, children’s developmental needs changing, or one parent consistently violating orders. Courts resist frequent modifications for stability. You typically must wait two years unless emergency circumstances exist. Document everything supporting modification needs.

Q: What role do step-parents have in Utah custody?

A: Step-parents have no automatic rights but can petition for visitation if they’ve established a substantial relationship and it serves children’s best interests. In practice, courts rarely grant step-parent visitation over biological parent objections. However, step-parents may be considered in custody evaluations as part of household stability assessment. Remarriage alone doesn’t justify custody modification unless it substantially impacts children.

Q: How are special needs children’s custody handled?

A: Courts consider which parent better understands and meets special needs, including medical care, therapy, educational advocacy, and consistency in routines. Evaluations assess each parent’s knowledge of the condition, commitment to treatment, and ability to coordinate services. The parent who’s been primary caregiver for special needs often receives preference. Utah courts may order specific provisions addressing therapy schedules, medication management, and educational decisions.

Q: When should I hire a custody evaluator privately?

A: Consider private evaluation if you believe court-appointed evaluator is biased, have complex mental health or developmental issues requiring specialized expertise, or need expedited evaluation for urgent circumstances. Private evaluations can support your case but carry less weight than court-ordered ones. Cost ranges $2,000-$10,000. Ensure evaluator meets Utah Rule 4-903 requirements for custody evaluators.

Closing

Utah’s evolving custody laws reflect growing understanding of children’s psychological needs and family dynamics complexity. The shift toward shared parenting and evidence-based decisions means parents must prepare differently for custody proceedings. Understanding these changes and working within the new framework gives you the best chance of achieving arrangements that truly serve your children.

The increased reliance on psychological evaluations and professional assessments means your mental health, parenting capacity, and ability to cooperate with your ex-spouse are under scrutiny like never before. This isn’t just about legal strategy–it’s about demonstrating genuine commitment to your children’s wellbeing above personal conflicts.

Remember that custody decisions shape more than living arrangements–they influence your children’s emotional security, identity development, and future relationships. The court’s goal aligns with yours: ensuring children maintain meaningful relationships with both parents when safe and appropriate. Working within this framework, rather than against it, serves everyone’s interests.

Whether you’re beginning divorce proceedings or modifying existing arrangements, don’t navigate Utah’s complex custody laws alone. Professional evaluation and guidance can clarify your situation, identify strengths and concerns, and provide roadmap for achieving custody arrangements that protect your children’s best interests while preserving your parental rights.

For parents facing custody evaluations or needing psychological assessments for court proceedings in Utah, professional assessment can clarify parenting capacity and family needs. This article was written by Dr. Steve Szykula and Jason Sadora at Comprehensive Psychological Services (WeCanHelpOut.com) which provides court-recognized evaluations meeting Utah Rule 4-903 requirements, offering evidence-based recommendations for custody arrangements that serve children’s best interests.