## Facts

- Kevin Smith (father) and Victoria Smith (mother) divorced, and Victoria was awarded sole residential custody of their two children.
- The older child (a boy) later expressed a desire to live as a girl, including using a girl’s name (Christine) and wearing girls’ clothes.
- Victoria supported and encouraged the child’s female presentation and allowed the child to attend transgender support groups.
- Victoria told Kevin the child had gender-identity disorder; Kevin disagreed.
- Kevin moved to modify custody, alleging Victoria planned to enroll the child in a new school as a girl under the name Christine and that she intended medical steps to change the child’s sex.
- The trial court entered an emergency temporary order reallocating parental rights to Kevin and directed that the children be returned to the prior community/school setting; it also barred, during the dispute, treatment or counseling for gender identity disorder, transgender support-group attendance, use of a female name, and wearing girls’ clothing.
- In later proceedings, the court received extensive evidence, including multiple witnesses and materials such as photos, emails, and videotapes.
- The trial court found the older child also displayed many behaviors the court associated with boys (such as primarily having boy friends, being attracted to girls, and engaging in activities like shooting BB guns).
- The trial court modified custody to give Kevin custody from Tuesday to Sunday and Victoria custody from Sunday to Tuesday, and it ordered that the child not use a girl’s name, wear girls’ clothes, or participate in transgender support groups.
- The trial court later concluded Victoria was unlikely to comply with the restrictions and granted Kevin sole residential custody.
- Victoria appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether the trial court abused its discretion under Ohio custody-modification standards by reallocating parental rights and naming Kevin the residential parent.
2. Whether the trial court abused its discretion by restricting the child’s use of a female name, wearing girls’ clothing, and participation in transgender support groups as part of the custody/parenting-time orders.
3. Whether the trial court erred in granting Kevin sole residential custody based in part on concerns that Victoria would not follow the court’s directives.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s custody modification and the later order granting Kevin sole residential custody.
- The court held the trial court acted within its discretion in determining that modification was justified under Ohio’s change-of-circumstances and best-interests framework.
- The court upheld the challenged restrictions as part of the trial court’s custody orders in light of its best-interests findings and concerns about compliance.

## Legal Principles

- Appellate review of custody-allocation and custody-modification orders is highly deferential; reversal requires a showing of abuse of discretion.
- Under Ohio law, a court may modify a prior custody decree when the statutory requirements are met, including a qualifying change in circumstances and a determination that the modification serves the child’s best interests.
- In allocating parental rights and responsibilities and setting parenting time, trial courts may impose conditions directed to the child’s welfare, and may consider a parent’s willingness and ability to follow court orders when deciding residential custody.

## Conclusion

Smith v. Smith affirmed a post-decree custody modification in which the trial court transferred residential custody from the mother to the father after disputes about the older child’s female presentation and the mother’s encouragement of it, upheld orders barring the child’s use of a female name, girls’ clothing, and transgender support-group participation, and sustained the later award of sole residential custody to the father based on the court’s best-interests findings and concerns that the mother would not comply with the custody conditions.


Smith v. Smith, 2007 WL 901599 (2007)