Utah Best Interests of the Child Explained

How Utah Courts Decide Child Custody: The “Best Interests of the Child” Explained

Parents involved in a custody dispute in Saratoga Springs, Eagle Mountain, Lehi, or elsewhere in Salt Lake, Utah County, or throughout Utah often come into court with one central concern: How will the judge decide custody of my child?

In Utah, the answer always begins—and ends—with the “child’s best interests”. Utah judges do not decide custody based on who “deserves” more time, who filed first, or who made more money during the marriage. Instead, custody decisions are governed by Utah Code Title 81, Chapter 9, which requires the court to carefully examine the child’s needs and each parent’s ability to meet those needs.

Because custody is often the most emotionally charged issue in a divorce or parentage case, it is usually addressed alongside other family-law matters. If you are in the early stages of a case, it may help to first review our overview of Utah divorce and family law services to see how custody fits into the broader legal process.

The Legal Framework Under Utah Code Title 81

Utah’s custody laws are now codified under Title 81, replacing the former Title 30 statutes. The primary statute governing custody determinations is Utah Code § 81-9-204, which directs courts to consider a range of factors that affect the child’s safety, stability, and development. There is also a rebuttable presumption of joint legal custody under § 81-9-205, meaning courts generally expect both parents to share decision-making authority unless evidence shows that would not be appropriate.

For parents seeking to change an existing custody order, additional standards apply, which are discussed in more detail on our custody modification page.

Safety Always Comes First

One of the most important considerations in any Utah custody case is whether there are safety concerns. Courts must consider evidence of domestic violence, child abuse, neglect, or other conduct that endangers a child’s physical or emotional well-being. When credible safety concerns exist, they often outweigh every other factor.

For example, if a parent in a Saratoga Springs custody case has a history of domestic violence supported by police reports or protective orders, the court may limit that parent’s custody or require supervised parent-time. In those situations, custody decisions often intersect with protective orders and domestic violence matters.

Meeting the Child’s Day-to-Day Needs

Utah courts look closely at which parent is best able to meet the child’s physical, emotional, educational, and medical needs. Judges are interested in real-world parenting, not abstract promises. This includes who attends medical appointments, communicates with teachers, helps with homework, and supports the child emotionally.

In a Lehi custody dispute, for instance, a parent who has consistently coordinated school services, therapy, and healthcare may be viewed as better positioned to meet the child’s needs than a parent who has been largely disengaged. These issues are central to most child custody and parent-time cases.

Parenting Skills and the Ability to Co-Parent

Another critical factor is whether parents can work together for the child’s benefit. Utah courts strongly favor parents who can communicate respectfully and encourage the child’s relationship with the other parent. Judges take a dim view of behavior that interferes with parent-time, withholds information, or places the child in the middle of adult conflict.

For example, in an Eagle Mountain case, a parent who repeatedly refuses to share school or medical information—or who undermines the other parent’s relationship with the child—may harm their own custody position. In higher-conflict cases, parents sometimes benefit from family law mediation to improve communication and reduce conflict.

Hands-On Parenting and Stability

Courts may also consider which parent has historically provided hands-on, personal care, rather than relying heavily on third-party caregivers. This does not penalize working parents, but it does focus on meaningful involvement in the child’s daily life.

Judges also look at stability—who has been the primary caregiver, what the child’s routine has been, and whether the child has been thriving under an existing arrangement. If a child has lived primarily with one parent in Saratoga Springs and is doing well academically and socially, the court may be reluctant to disrupt that stability without a strong reason.

Emotional Stability, Character, and Substance Use

Utah courts are permitted to consider a parent’s emotional stability, moral character, and any substance abuse issues that affect parenting ability. Importantly, past problems do not automatically disqualify a parent. Courts look for evidence of rehabilitation, treatment compliance, and long-term stability.

For example, a Utah County parent with a prior substance-use issue who has demonstrated sustained sobriety and responsible parenting may still be awarded custody or joint custody, depending on the evidence.

Siblings and Extended Family Relationships

Judges also consider the child’s relationships with siblings and extended family members. Maintaining sibling bonds is often seen as an important component of a child’s emotional well-being.

In practical terms, Utah courts generally prefer custody arrangements that keep siblings together or allow them to spend substantial time together, unless there is a compelling reason to separate them.

The Child’s Wishes

A child’s preference may be considered if the child is mature enough to express a reasoned choice. Utah law gives added weight to the wishes of children age 14 and older, but those wishes are never controlling. Judges evaluate the child’s preference in light of all other best-interest factors.

For example, a mature teenager in an Eagle Mountain case may express a desire to live primarily with one parent, and that preference may carry weight if it aligns with stability, safety, and the child’s overall well-being.

Joint Legal Custody in Utah

Under Utah Code § 81-9-205, there is a rebuttable presumption that joint legal custody—shared decision-making authority—is in the child’s best interests. Joint legal custody does not require equal parent-time and is often paired with one parent having primary physical custody.

You can read more about how this works in practice on our joint custody page.

When a Custody Evaluation Is Needed

When parents cannot agree on custody and key facts are disputed, the court may order a custody evaluation under Utah Code of Judicial Administration Rule 4-903. Custody evaluations are common in high-conflict cases in Utah County, including Saratoga Springs, Eagle Mountain, and Lehi.

A custody evaluator is a neutral, licensed professional who assesses the family dynamics and provides the court with recommendations focused on the child’s best interests. Evaluators typically review parent-child interactions, communication patterns, safety concerns, school and medical records, and the statutory factors under Title 81.

Because evaluations are intrusive and expensive, courts order them only when necessary. You can learn more about the process on our custody evaluations page.

Why Local Experience Matters in Utah County Custody Cases

Child custody cases are evidence-driven and highly fact-specific. Judges in Utah County expect detailed findings under Title 81, and outcomes often turn on how well the evidence is presented.

If you are dealing with a custody dispute, enforcement issue, or modification in Saratoga Springs, Eagle Mountain, Lehi, or anywhere in Utah County, working with an experienced Utah custody attorney can make a meaningful difference.

You may also find these related resources helpful:

Frequently Asked Questions

Information on our Service Areas

Subscribe and Follow