“Right of First Refusal” Clauses in Minnesota Parenting-Time Orders: Pros & Pitfalls

When parents share custody, one of the most common questions is: What happens when one parent can’t care for the child during their scheduled time? 

In Minnesota, some parenting-time orders include a “right of first refusal” (ROFR) clause — a rule that gives the other parent the opportunity to care for the child before a babysitter, friend, or family member steps in.

While these clauses can strengthen parent-child relationships, they can also create conflict if not carefully structured. 

This blog explains what the right of first refusal means under Minnesota law, how it works, and what to consider before adding it to your parenting-time order.

Contact Martine Law today. 

What is the “right of first refusal” in Minnesota parenting cases?

A right of first refusal clause gives one parent the option to care for their child when the other parent is temporarily unavailable during their scheduled parenting time.

For example:
If Parent A has the child for the weekend but needs to work Saturday evening, a right of first refusal clause would require Parent A to offer Parent B the chance to watch the child before arranging for a babysitter or family member.

This clause ensures that both parents get maximum parenting time and that children spend time with their parents rather than third parties.

While Minnesota’s custody statutes (Minn. Stat. § 518.175) don’t automatically grant this right, courts can include it if they believe it serves the best interests of the child.

Learn more about how parenting time works on Martine Law’s Minnesota child custody page.

How the right of first refusal works

A typical right of first refusal clause defines:

• How long the parent must be away before the right applies (for example, 4 hours, 8 hours, or overnight). 
• How much notice the unavailable parent must give the other parent. 
• How communication should occur (email, text, or a parenting app). 
• Who handles transportation for drop-offs and pickups. 
• Exceptions, such as emergencies, family events, or pre-approved caregivers. 

Example clause:

“If either parent is unable to care for the child for more than 6 hours during their scheduled parenting time, that parent shall first offer the other parent the opportunity to care for the child before making other childcare arrangements. The parent exercising this right shall provide at least 24 hours’ notice, unless an emergency arises.”

By clearly spelling out the details, parents can prevent misunderstandings and ensure smoother cooperation.

Pros of right of first refusal clauses

1. Encourages greater parental involvement

It helps both parents stay active in their child’s life, especially when schedules fluctuate. Children benefit from more consistent time with both parents rather than with third parties.

2. Reduces reliance on childcare

Instead of paying babysitters or daycare providers, parents can rely on one another for short-term care.

3. Strengthens parent-child relationships

Additional contact time can help reinforce bonds and provide emotional stability for children after divorce or separation.

4. Shows cooperation to the court

Courts look favorably on parents who show flexibility and willingness to work together in the child’s best interests.

Pitfalls and common problems

Despite its benefits, a right of first refusal can cause more conflict if not properly defined or managed.

1. Frequent disputes over timing

Without clear rules, parents may argue about what qualifies as “too short” or “too long” of an absence. Some parents try to use the clause to monitor or control the other parent’s schedule.

2. Lack of flexibility for work or social events

If the notice period is too strict, parents might feel trapped by having to contact the other parent for every short absence, even for errands or family gatherings.

3. Poor communication

If parents already struggle to communicate civilly, ROFR clauses can lead to tension, accusations, or repeated court motions.

4. Unrealistic expectations

If one parent lives far away or has an unpredictable work schedule, exercising the right may not always be practical.

5. Risk of misuse

Some parents attempt to use ROFR clauses to interfere with the other’s time or micromanage their parenting decisions.

These issues can escalate unless the clause is drafted precisely and both parents understand its limits.

For help crafting parenting-time provisions that reduce conflict, visit Martine Law’s family law page.

When Minnesota courts favor or deny ROFR clauses

Judges consider whether a right of first refusal serves the best interests of the child and aligns with both parents’ schedules.

A court is more likely to approve ROFR when:

• Parents live close to each other. 
• Both parents can communicate reasonably well. 
• The clause doesn’t disrupt the child’s school, activities, or stability. 

Courts are less likely to include ROFR when:

• Parents have a history of conflict or poor communication. 
• The arrangement would cause excessive exchanges or instability. 
• It appears one parent is trying to control or inconvenience the other. 

The key question for judges is whether the arrangement benefits the child, not the parents.

Don’t let this ruin your life. Contact an attorney today. 

Tips for making the right of first refusal work

1. Define time thresholds clearly.
   Example: “Applies only to absences longer than 8 hours or overnight.” 
2. Set a reasonable notice period.
   At least 24 hours’ notice is typical unless there’s an emergency. 
3. Use structured communication tools.
   Parenting apps like OurFamilyWizard or TalkingParents help reduce misunderstandings and keep records of communication. 
4. Keep the child’s routine consistent.
   Avoid unnecessary last-minute changes or late-night exchanges that disrupt the child’s schedule. 
5. Stay respectful and flexible.
   Even though the clause is enforceable, courts expect both parents to act in good faith and avoid using it for control or retaliation. 

If disputes arise, a Minnesota custody attorney can help clarify terms or request modifications through the court.

Alternatives to right of first refusal clauses

If direct cooperation is difficult, Minnesota parents can use alternatives such as:

• Designated backup caregivers both parents trust. 
• Parenting consultants to handle scheduling disputes. 
• Parallel parenting plans that reduce direct contact while maintaining structure. 

You can learn more about parallel parenting vs. co-parenting in our Minnesota custody guide.

Key takeaways

• The right of first refusal gives the other parent a chance to care for the child before third parties do. 
• It promotes parental involvement but can lead to disputes if poorly defined. 
• Courts decide based on what serves the best interests of the child, not parental convenience. 
• Detailed terms, good communication, and realistic expectations are essential. 
• An experienced family law attorney can help draft or modify a clause that fits your family’s needs. 

If you’re creating or modifying a Minnesota parenting-time order and want to include (or avoid) a right of first refusal clause, Martine Law can help. Our family law attorneys will craft a parenting plan that supports your child’s best interests and minimizes future conflict.

Contact Martine Law today to schedule a confidential consultation.