## Facts

- Angela Maxwell and Robert Maxwell married in 1994 and had three children (born 1997, 1999, and 2005).
- The parties separated in September 2010; Robert petitioned for dissolution and sought sole custody, while Angela sought joint and shared custody.
- In October 2010, the parties entered an agreed order providing joint custody with equal, alternating week-to-week parenting time and restricting non-family overnight guests during a parent’s custodial week.
- During the case, Angela entered a committed same-sex relationship and cohabited with her partner; Robert sought contempt based on alleged violations of the overnight-guest restriction.
- By January 2011, divorce issues were resolved except custody, parenting time, child support, and related matters; Robert had exclusive use of the marital residence.
- The family court held a final hearing in September 2011, receiving testimony from nine witnesses, including the two older children.
- Evidence showed Angela had personal and emotional difficulties and sometimes struggled with shared-parenting logistics, but there was no showing that the children were harmed; the children expressed positive feelings toward their mother and a desire to continue shared time.
- The record reflected that Angela’s same-sex cohabitation was a major focus in Robert’s custody position and in the family court’s concerns, including perceived risk of social disapproval toward same-sex couples.

## Issues

1. Whether the family court abused its discretion in awarding sole custody to the father and sharply limiting the mother’s parenting time under Kentucky’s best-interests standard.
2. Whether the family court improperly relied on the mother’s sexual orientation, same-sex cohabitation, or predicted societal disapproval as grounds to restrict custody or timesharing absent evidence of harm to the children.

## Decision

- The Kentucky Court of Appeals reversed the final custody order and remanded.
- The court held the family court abused its discretion by basing the custody and timesharing restrictions largely on the mother’s same-sex relationship and speculative concerns about societal reactions rather than evidence tied to the children’s welfare.
- The court directed the family court to reassess custody and parenting time under the statutory best-interests factors without improper reliance on sexual orientation or speculative social stigma.

## Legal Principles

- Child-custody and timesharing determinations must be grounded in the statutory best-interests-of-the-child factors and supported by evidence related to the child’s welfare.
- A parent’s sexual orientation or participation in a same-sex relationship, standing alone, is not a valid basis to deny custody or substantially restrict parenting time.
- Speculation that children may face bias or disapproval from third parties due to a parent’s lawful relationship does not justify custody restrictions absent evidence of actual or likely harm to the children.
- A custody order that substantially curtails a parent’s contact without evidentiary support, or that appears to punish lawful parental conduct unrelated to child welfare, may constitute an abuse of discretion.

## Conclusion

The Court of Appeals reversed and remanded because the custody and visitation restrictions were driven by the mother’s same-sex relationship and speculative concerns about social stigma, not by evidence showing detriment to the children under the best-interests standard.


Maxwell v. Maxwell, 382 S.W.3d 892 (Ky. Ct. App. 2012)