## Facts

- Walter and Jacqueline Jarrett divorced in Cook County, Illinois; they had three daughters, approximately 12, 10, and 7 years old at the time.
- The divorce decree granted custody to Jacqueline, with Walter receiving visitation at reasonable times and commonly having the children from Saturday evening to Sunday evening; Jacqueline also had use of the family home and child support.
- Several months after the divorce, Jacqueline informed Walter that her boyfriend, Wayne Hammon, would move into the family home; Walter objected.
- Hammon moved in on May 1, 1977, and Jacqueline and Hammon cohabited in the home without marrying.
- The children were initially unhappy about Hammon moving in and asked whether Jacqueline intended to marry him; she stated she did not know.
- Jacqueline testified she did not plan to marry soon and cited personal beliefs about marriage and concern that remarriage would require selling the family home, which she did not want to do.
- Walter conceded the children were physically well cared for but argued that the open, continuing nonmarital cohabitation created an improper moral environment.
- Walter petitioned to modify custody based on changed circumstances; the circuit court granted the petition and transferred custody to Walter, with visitation to Jacqueline at reasonable times.

## Issues

1. Whether a custodial parent’s open, continuing cohabitation with an unrelated adult partner outside marriage can constitute a material change in circumstances justifying modification of custody under the children’s best interests, absent proof of specific present harm.
2. Whether a court may consider the children’s moral and emotional welfare, including likely future detriment inferred from community standards, in deciding custody modification.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of Illinois reversed the appellate court and affirmed the circuit court’s order transferring custody to Walter.
- The court held that Jacqueline’s open, continuing cohabitation in the children’s home, coupled with her intent to maintain that arrangement without marriage, could support a finding that the children’s best interests warranted a custody change.
- The court rejected a requirement that the moving parent show concrete, already-manifested harm to the children before modification could be ordered.
- The court emphasized deference to the trial court’s custody determination and declined to disturb it as against the manifest weight of the evidence.

## Legal Principles

- Child custody modification requires a material change in circumstances and a determination that modification serves the children’s best interests.
- “Best interests” includes moral and emotional welfare as well as physical care; a parent’s conduct and the home’s moral environment are relevant considerations.
- A trial court may act to protect children from a probable adverse effect on moral or emotional development; it need not wait for demonstrable present injury.
- Custody determinations are reviewed deferentially and will not be reversed unless contrary to the manifest weight of the evidence.

## Conclusion

The Illinois Supreme Court upheld a custody modification transferring custody to the father where the mother openly cohabited with a nonspouse in the children’s home and intended to continue doing so, concluding that the trial court could find the arrangement inconsistent with the children’s best interests even without proof of specific current harm.


Jarrett v. Jarrett, 400 N.E.2d 421 (Ill. 1979)