In re S.H., ___ N.C. App. ___ (March 18, 2026)
Held:
Affirmed
There is a dissent
in part by Collins, J.
- Facts: The three children at issue were adjudicated neglected. The trial court ultimately entered a permanency planning order granting sole legal and physical custody of the children to Father. Mother was awarded secondary physical custody with visitation every other weekend and additional periods as mutually agreed to by the parties. The trial court terminated jurisdiction in the juvenile proceeding and a Chapter 50 custody order was entered to the same effect. Mother appeals, arguing the visitation order is not supported by the findings, is contrary to the children’s best interests, and improperly delegates its authority to order visitation to Father.
- Civil orders regarding visitation are reviewed for an abuse of discretion.
- G.S. 50-13.2(b) requires custody orders to include terms, including visitation, that “will best promote the interest and welfare of the child.” Sl. Op. at 9. The trial court has broad discretion in ordering visitation but its determination must be supported by findings of fact and evidence. Appellate precedent holds that a custody order which delegates visitation by a parent entirely to the discretion of the child’s custodian constitutes per se abuse of discretion.
- The trial court did not abuse its discretion or improperly delegate its judicial authority in the visitation order. The visitation order provided specific, regular visitation periods (Friday at 6 PM to Sundays at 6 PM every other weekend) with supplemental visitation permitted at the discretion and coordination of the parties. The order did not wholly delegate visitation to the discretion of the primary custodian. The order reflected a balancing of interests and reasoned exercise of discretion as to the best interest determination “naturally predicate to its findings of fact and other conclusions of law.” Sl. Op. at 12.
- Dissent in part: The permanency planning order should be vacated as to visitation and remanded for the trial court to revise the visitation schedule to address holidays or for further findings to support the schedule ordered. The transcript shows confusion as to whether the visitation schedule announced at the conclusion of the permanency planning hearing was to be reviewed within a few months at a hearing under G.S. Chapter 7B versus a permanent visitation schedule under a Ch. 50 order that requires a substantial change in circumstances.
Category:
Abuse, Neglect, DependencyStage:
VisitationTopic:
Order