When a child is being raised by someone other than a parent, family court can feel confusing fast. A grandparent may be doing school pickups every day. An aunt may have had the child living with her for months. A long-term caregiver may be the person the child sees as “mom” or “dad,” even without an adoption order in place.
In those situations, one of the first legal questions is often standing. In simple terms, standing is the legal right to bring a claim before the court at all. If a person does not have standing, the court may dismiss the case before it ever reaches the bigger questions about custody, visitation, or the child’s best interests. Cornell Law School’s Legal Information Institute explains standing as the capacity of a party to bring a lawsuit, and in state court that issue is usually controlled by state statutes and state case law.
This matters because non-parent cases are common in real life, even though the law often starts from a strong presumption in favor of parents. The U.S. Supreme Court recognized in Troxel v. Granville that fit parents have a fundamental liberty interest in the care, custody, and control of their children, which is why non-parent petitions often face a higher threshold than disputes between two legal parents. At the same time, kinship caregiving remains a major part of child welfare in the United States. The Annie E. Casey Foundation’s KIDS COUNT data show that millions of children live in kinship-care arrangements, and federal child welfare data continue to show substantial use of relative or kin placements when children enter foster care. See KIDS COUNT’s kinship-care data and the federal overview discussed by ASPE.
In this post, you’ll learn nine common situations where non-parents may have standing in family court, why the answer changes from state to state, and where an attorney often becomes especially important. If you want a broader look at how relatives and other caregivers fit into custody law, this guide on when grandparents or other caregivers can step into a custody case gives helpful background.
<aside> 💡 Scroll to the bottom for every post in this series.
</aside>
In family court, many people focus on the end result: custody, visitation, guardianship, or decision-making authority. But standing comes first.
A judge usually cannot decide whether a non-parent ought to receive custody or visitation until the judge decides whether that person is legally allowed to ask. That distinction is important. A child may have a strong emotional bond with a non-parent caregiver, but if the applicable statute or doctrine does not recognize that person’s status, the case may stop there.
That is one reason non-parent custody and visitation cases vary so much. Some states rely heavily on statutes. Some recognize doctrines like de facto parent, psychological parent, or in loco parentis. The American Bar Association notes that standing for nonparents differs significantly across jurisdictions, and some states have begun codifying forms of de facto parentage.
One of the most familiar examples is a grandparent petitioning for visitation after a divorce, death, separation, or other family rupture.
Many states have statutes that specifically address grandparent visitation, but those statutes often come with limits. That is partly because of Troxel, where the Supreme Court struck down Washington’s third-party visitation law as applied, emphasizing that courts must give weight to a fit parent’s decisions about a child’s associations. In other words, a grandparent may have standing in some circumstances, but standing alone does not erase the parental presumption. Cornell’s summary of child custody law also notes that fit parents are generally presumed to act in their child’s best interests.
This kind of standing often appears where:
Some states are more open to these claims than others, and some require proof that denying contact may harm the child or significantly disrupt an existing bond.