How Michigan Courts Decide Custody: The 12 Best Interest Factors

When parents cannot agree on custody, a Michigan court must decide for them. The framework for that decision is not discretionary — it is statutory. Under the Child Custody Act of 1970, MCL 722.23, the court is required to evaluate 12 specific factors and make findings on each one. The parent whose case best aligns with these factors across the board has the strongest position.

What follows is a detailed explanation of each factor, how courts apply them in practice, and what evidence matters most.

The 12 Best Interest Factors Under MCL 722.23

Factor 1: Love, affection, and other emotional ties existing between the parties involved and the child.

This factor examines the emotional bond between each parent and the child. Courts look at the quality of the relationship — not just whether a parent loves the child, but whether the child has a meaningful emotional connection to each parent. Evidence includes testimony about daily routines, bedtime rituals, how the child responds to each parent, and the depth of the parent-child relationship. In most cases, both parents score similarly on this factor unless one parent has been largely absent.

Factor 2: The capacity and disposition of the parties involved to give the child love, affection, and guidance and to continue the education and raising of the child in his or her religion or creed, if any.

This factor looks forward rather than backward. It assesses each parent's ability and willingness to provide emotional support, educational guidance, and religious continuity. Courts consider whether each parent actively participates in the child's education, attends school events, helps with homework, and supports the child's extracurricular and religious activities.

Factor 3: The capacity and disposition of the parties involved to provide the child with food, clothing, medical care or other remedial care recognized and permitted under the laws of this state in place of medical care, and other material needs.

This factor addresses each parent's ability to meet the child's basic physical needs. It is not a test of which parent earns more — child support exists to equalize financial disparities. Rather, it examines whether each parent can and does provide adequate housing, nutrition, medical care, and basic necessities. A parent who has consistently neglected a child's medical appointments or maintained unsafe living conditions will score poorly here.

Factor 4: The length of time the child has lived in a stable, satisfactory environment, and the desirability of maintaining continuity.

Stability matters. Courts are reluctant to disrupt a child's established routine — their home, school, friendships, and community connections. A parent who has been the child's primary caretaker in a stable home has a significant advantage on this factor. Conversely, a parent proposing to relocate the child to a new community faces the burden of showing that the disruption serves the child's interests.

Factor 5: The permanence, as a family unit, of the existing or proposed custodial home or homes.

This factor evaluates the stability of each parent's household. Courts consider whether the parent has a stable living situation, a committed relationship (if applicable), and a home environment that provides permanence. Frequent moves, revolving romantic partners, or unstable housing arrangements weigh against a parent on this factor.

Factor 6: The moral fitness of the parties involved.

Moral fitness is not a general character assessment — it is evaluated in the context of parenting. A parent's conduct is relevant under this factor only to the extent it affects their ability to parent effectively. Substance abuse, criminal conduct, exposing children to inappropriate situations, and dishonesty in court proceedings are all relevant. Personal lifestyle choices that do not affect parenting are generally not considered.

Factor 7: The mental and physical health of the parties involved.

Courts consider whether either parent has mental or physical health conditions that affect their parenting capacity. This factor is not a penalty for having a health condition — it is an assessment of whether any condition impairs a parent's ability to care for the child. A parent managing a mental health condition with treatment and medication who parents effectively will not be penalized. A parent whose untreated condition creates instability or risk for the child will be evaluated accordingly.

Factor 8: The home, school, and community record of the child.

This factor looks at how the child is doing in their current environment. Strong academic performance, positive social relationships, involvement in community activities, and overall well-being all suggest that the current arrangement is working. Problems at school, behavioral issues, or declining performance may suggest the need for a change — or may indicate that the child is affected by the conflict between the parents rather than the custody arrangement itself.

Factor 9: The reasonable preference of the child, if the court considers the child to be of sufficient age to express preference.

Michigan law does not set a specific age at which a child can express a custody preference. In practice, courts begin giving meaningful weight to a child's preference around age 12 to 14, though this varies by judge and by the maturity of the child. The preference must be "reasonable" — a child who prefers one parent because that parent has fewer rules will not be given the same weight as a child who articulates substantive reasons related to their well-being. Courts typically interview children in chambers, outside the presence of the parents, to minimize the pressure of choosing sides.

Factor 10: The willingness and ability of each of the parties to facilitate and encourage a close and continuing parent-child relationship between the child and the other parent or the child and the parents.

This is often called the "friendly parent" factor, and it carries substantial weight in practice. Courts want to place children with the parent who is most likely to support the child's relationship with the other parent. A parent who badmouths the other parent, interferes with parenting time, makes false allegations, or attempts to alienate the child from the other parent will score very poorly on this factor — and it can be decisive. Conversely, a parent who actively facilitates the child's relationship with the other parent demonstrates the kind of co-parenting disposition courts reward.

Factor 11: Domestic violence, regardless of whether the violence was directed against or witnessed by the child.

When domestic violence is present, this factor can override all others. The statute explicitly states that domestic violence is relevant regardless of whether the child was a direct victim or a witness. A documented history of domestic violence — police reports, PPOs, medical records, witness testimony — weighs heavily against the perpetrator. Courts recognize that domestic violence affects children even when they are not physically harmed, and that a household characterized by violence is not in a child's best interest.

Factor 12: Any other factor considered by the court to be relevant to a particular child custody dispute.

This catch-all factor allows the court to consider anything else relevant to the child's best interest that does not fit neatly into the other 11 factors. Courts have used this factor to consider issues such as a parent's work schedule, the proximity of extended family, special needs of the child, and the logistics of proposed parenting arrangements.

How Judges Weigh the Factors

The statute does not assign numerical weights or create a hierarchy among the factors. Each case is fact-specific, and the relative importance of each factor depends on the circumstances. However, patterns emerge in practice:

• Factor 10 (willingness to facilitate the other parent's relationship) is consistently among the most influential factors. Courts view co-parenting ability as a strong predictor of positive outcomes for children.
• Factor 11 (domestic violence) is effectively dispositive when well-documented. Courts will not place children in the primary care of a parent with a credible history of violence.
• Factor 4 (stability and continuity) is difficult to overcome. The parent who has been providing day-to-day care in a stable environment has an inherent advantage that the other parent must affirmatively rebut.
• Factors that tend to be neutral in many cases include Factor 3 (material needs, often equalized by child support), Factor 7 (health, when both parents are healthy), and Factor 1 (emotional ties, when both parents have strong bonds).

What Evidence Matters

A best interest hearing is an evidentiary proceeding. The quality of your evidence — not the strength of your feelings — determines the outcome. Effective evidence includes:

• Documentation of parenting involvement: School conference attendance, medical appointment records, communication with teachers and coaches, and participation in daily routines.
• Third-party testimony: Teachers, pediatricians, therapists, coaches, and family members who can speak to each parent's involvement and the child's well-being.
• Communications between the parties: Text messages and emails that demonstrate cooperation or obstruction, co-parenting efforts or alienation attempts.
• Professional evaluations: Custody evaluations, psychological assessments, and guardian ad litem reports carry significant weight with courts.
• Records of stability: Housing history, employment history, and consistency of the child's routine under each parent's care.

For a broader overview of custody and parenting time in Michigan, see our Oakland County child custody guide.

Frequently Asked Questions