Reviewed by the Marketing Team Last updated
A Minnesota parenting plan under section 518.1705 must include a parenting schedule, decision-making responsibilities, and a method for resolving disputes. Additional terms should make the arrangement workable for the child and parents. Safety protections and the applicable court process matter; not every case must use a statutory parenting plan.
A useful plan answers ordinary questions clearly: where the child will be, who makes major decisions, how exchanges work, and how a disagreement is addressed. It should fit the family rather than copy every clause from a generic template.
What are the three required elements?
Minnesota Statutes section 518.1705, subdivision 2 identifies the core elements: a schedule of each parent’s time, designation of decision-making responsibilities, and a dispute-resolution method. Parents may include other agreed child-related matters.
These categories are the starting point. The details below are practical drafting considerations, not a claim that every listed provision is individually mandated by the statute.
How should the parenting schedule be written?
Identify the regular weekly schedule with clear start and end times. Then address holidays, school breaks, vacations, and special occasions. Explain which provision takes priority when schedules overlap.
Consider the child’s age, school, activities, health needs, travel time, and the parents’ actual availability. “Alternate weekends” alone may not answer whether a weekend starts after school or at a particular evening time.
- Specify exchange locations and transportation responsibilities.
- Address school-closure days and changes to the school calendar.
- Explain vacation notice and how competing requests are handled.
- Clarify late arrivals and unexpected disruptions.
- Consider how the child communicates with the other parent during longer periods away.
How should decision-making responsibilities be described?
Identify responsibility for major decisions and how parents will exchange information or consult when required. Education, health care, and religious upbringing are central legal-custody subjects. Avoid leaving unclear whether a proposed clause concerns a major decision, a routine daily choice, or scheduling.
Section 518.17 includes a rebuttable joint-legal-custody presumption when requested, with a separate presumption against joint custody when domestic abuse has occurred between the parents. A broad statement that courts always prefer shared decisions misses these qualifications.
Our Minnesota custody-factor guide explains the best-interests analysis and related protections.
What dispute-resolution method belongs in the plan?
Define the process, its scope, and how it begins. Do not list mediation, an expeditor, arbitration, and counseling as though each has the same function or authority. Review the proposed neutral’s role and any appointment terms with counsel.
Safety exceptions are essential. Section 518.1705, subdivision 6, prohibits requiring nonjudicial dispute resolution in preparing a parenting plan when a parent is alleged to have committed domestic abuse toward a parent or child involved in the matter. Other statutory restrictions can also apply.
A plan should not force an unsafe direct confrontation or make parents assume they must wait through a routine process before seeking appropriate urgent court relief. For additional context, see custody mediation versus court.
Which additional provisions can reduce ambiguity?
- Communication: A workable channel, appropriate topics, and realistic response expectations.
- Information sharing: Notice of significant school or medical matters and the documents needed.
- Expenses: Defined categories, supporting records, reimbursement procedures, and consistency with support requirements.
- Substitute care: Whether a right-of-first-refusal clause is appropriate and, if so, its precise limits.
- Travel: Notice, itineraries, documents, and any restrictions required by the order.
- Future review: How parents will address a foreseeable transition without assuming the order changes automatically.
For substitute care, our right-of-first-refusal guide covers triggers, exceptions, and transportation questions.
Is a parenting plan required in every Minnesota case?
No. Section 518.1705 provides several routes and restrictions. When both parents request a parenting plan, the statute directs its creation unless the court makes specified findings. If parents do not agree, the court has qualified authority to create one on its own motion, with domestic-abuse limitations.
The statute also provides for custody and parenting-time orders when a plan is not used. A court order can contain detailed family-specific terms; it is not necessarily less tailored merely because it uses traditional custody terminology.
Can parents draft their own proposed plan?
Parents can develop a proposal for court review. Have the complete language checked for consistency with the child’s needs, applicable law, existing orders, and the intended outcome.
Walk through a normal week, a holiday week, an unexpected school closure, and an unresolved medical decision. If the proposal gives conflicting answers or no answer, revise it before submission. Keep children out of the role of negotiating or interpreting adult arrangements.
How can an existing plan be changed?
Do not assume every change requires the same showing or that changed circumstances alone are enough. The requested change may concern a schedule, decision-making, custody, or the child’s primary residence, each requiring attention to the governing provisions.
Section 518.1705 addresses plan modifications and court confirmation of agreed changes; section 518.175 and section 518.18 may also matter. Our modification-process guide explains why identifying the requested relief comes first.
Frequently asked questions about Minnesota parenting plans
Does a plan eliminate the need for custody designations?
Not necessarily. Section 518.1705 allows defined alternative terminology in specified circumstances but still requires custody designations in the final judgment for certain enforcement purposes. Have the final language reviewed.
Can our plan automatically authorize any future move?
Do not assume a general travel or notice clause resolves relocation. Moving a child’s residence can raise separate statutory and order requirements. Obtain advice before making a relocation commitment.
Should both homes have identical daily rules?
Consider which shared expectations are useful and realistic. An overly detailed rule for every ordinary choice can create unnecessary disputes. Focus on the child’s important needs and the decisions the plan must resolve.
What if the other parent does not follow the plan?
Preserve the order and specific records of what occurred, then seek advice about interpretation, enforcement, or modification. Do not respond by disregarding unrelated obligations. Immediate safety concerns require prompt attention.
Get help drafting or reviewing a parenting plan
Martine Law PLLC provides family-law services under the Martine Law brand. Request a consultation to review a proposed plan, current order, or recurring disagreement.
Phones and chat are answered 24/7, with AI covering when no staff is free.
This page provides general information about Minnesota law, not legal advice for your particular case.
For an overview of the law and how we help, see our Minnesota child custody and parenting time page.
