## Facts

- Divorcing parents disputed custody of their minor son, Bobby (born July 9, 1985).
- The mother recently converted to Jehovah’s Witnesses; the father remained Roman Catholic.
- The mother had been the child’s primary caretaker, worked part-time, and arranged family childcare; the father worked full-time and had family childcare available.
- The father emphasized the mother’s religious practices, asserting they would prevent the child from celebrating holidays/birthdays, limit extracurricular activities, restrict socialization with nonadherents, and discourage higher education.
- The father offered expert testimony suggesting (1) higher prevalence of mental illness among Jehovah’s Witnesses and (2) general developmental benefits of extracurricular activities.
- The trial court found both parents competent and loving but awarded custody to the father and restricted the mother’s visitation by ordering she not teach or expose the child to her religion.
- The court of appeals affirmed; the state supreme court reviewed whether the custody award and visitation restriction were improperly based on the mother’s religion.

## Issues

1. May a court deny a parent custody based on religious practices without probative evidence that those practices will adversely affect the child’s mental or physical health?
2. May a court restrict a noncustodial parent from exposing a child to the parent’s religion absent a showing that interparent religious conflict is affecting the child’s general welfare?

## Decision

- The state supreme court reversed and remanded.
- The court held the custody award and visitation restriction were improperly grounded in the mother’s religious beliefs and practices.
- The court found no probative evidence that the mother’s religious practices would adversely affect the child’s mental or physical health.
- The court held that predicted limits on social or patriotic activities, standing alone, were insufficient to justify denying custody or restricting religious exposure.
- The court held a visitation order may not bar religious exposure absent evidence that the parents’ religious conflict is affecting the child’s general welfare.

## Legal Principles

- A parent may not be denied custody on the basis of religious practices unless there is probative evidence those practices will adversely affect the child’s mental or physical health.
- Evidence that a child will not participate in certain social or patriotic activities, without more, is not sufficient to prove possible harm.
- A court may not restrict a noncustodial parent’s right to expose a child to religious beliefs unless conflict between the parents’ beliefs is affecting the child’s general welfare.
- Courts may consider religious practices only to protect the child’s best interests and may not evaluate the merits or content of religious doctrine.

## Conclusion

The court held that custody and visitation determinations cannot be used to penalize a parent’s religious practices; absent probative evidence of harm to the child’s health or welfare, courts may neither deny custody nor prohibit a parent from exposing the child to the parent’s faith.


Pater v. Pater, 63 Ohio St. 3d 393, 588 N.E.2d 794 (Ohio 1992)