Modification of Visitation

Since any modification of a visitation order was required to be in accordance with the relevant factors specified in the Illinois Marriage and Dissolution of Marriage Act, 750 ILCS 5/101, the trial court erred in not considering whether the mother’s proposed move to Florida was in the best interest of the child, which was a modification factor.  (DeBilio v. DeBilio)

This Act creates, in the case of child visitation rights, an exception to the general requirement that modification of a dissolution of marriage decree be preceded by a petition requesting modification by providing that the visitation rights may be modified whenever modification would serve the best interest of the child.  (In re Stanley)

The best interest of the child standard governs the modification of visiting rights whereas the endangerment standard governs the restriction of such rights where the court finds that the visitation as it exists seriously endangers the child’s physical, mental, moral or emotional health.  (In re Anderson)

A court may amend visitation privileges previously established, or in extreme cases, temporarily deny them altogether if the privilege is abused.  (Keefer v. Keefer)

An order of visitation is not final.  It can be modified as circumstances require, if it should appear reasonable and proper to do so upon motion of either parent and if the best interests of the child make is advisable.  (Smith v. Smith)

Burden of Proof

The party seeking to increase or otherwise modify visitation rights originally granted by the dissolution decree bears the burden of showing such alteration is in the best interests of the child.  (In re Tisckos)

The custodial parent bears the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that visitation would endanger the children.  (In re Neat)

The burden that proving that a modification would be in the best interest of the child is on the party seeking the modification.  (Valencia v. Valencia)

Where a circuit court is called upon to alter previously established visitation rights, it need not find that there has been a material change of circumstances since the original order; its decision is to be guided solely by what it perceives to be in the best interest of the child.  (Valencia v. Valencia)

Move Out-of-State

A reduction of weekend visitation from 50 hours to 31 hours and reduction of Summer visitation from four weeks to two weeks was not a restriction which had to meet the serious endangerment standard; the trial court could have changed visitation in this case to accommodate mother’s move without violating subsection C.  (In re Wycoff)

Although husband complained that the number of his visitation days was reduced by 29%, the fact the number of days of visitation was reduced was not dispositive; what was important was whether in a given case, a realistic and reasonable visitation schedule could be reached if move out-of-state was allowed.  (In re Deckard)

See Also:

Enforcement of Visitation 

When Should You Request a Modification to Your Visitation Order 

Burden of Proof