How do Nebraska courts decide when to limit or suspend a parent’s time with their child?

Nebraska courts strongly favor maintaining a child’s relationship with both parents. Parenting time is not reduced, supervised, or suspended lightly, and it is never treated as punishment for a parent. Instead, courts apply the “best interests of the child” standard, focusing on safety, emotional health, stability, and the child’s own lived experience.

In high-conflict custody cases, the hardest decisions arise when a child refuses contact, alleges abuse, or experiences severe emotional distress tied to one parent. In those situations, Nebraska judges must balance a strong presumption in favor of parenting time against credible evidence that contact may be harmful. The 2025 Nebraska Court of Appeals decision in Trent v. Trent offers a rare, detailed look at how courts navigate that balance.

Although the opinion is a memorandum decision and cannot be formally cited, its reasoning mirrors published Nebraska Supreme Court guidance and reflects how trial courts actually analyze complex custody disputes. The case involved allegations of sexual abuse, claims of parental alienation, non-traditional homeschooling practices, hygiene and medical-care concerns, and deeply fractured parent-child relationships. The court did not resolve these issues by choosing a “winner,” but by tailoring custody and parenting-time orders to each child’s circumstances.

Most importantly for parents, Trent confirms that Nebraska courts do not cut off parenting time simply because allegations are made, because parenting choices are unconventional, or because a parent is unpopular with a teenager. At the same time, courts will not force immediate contact when credible evidence shows a child would be emotionally harmed. Temporary suspension, therapy-based reunification, and graduated parenting plans are all tools Nebraska judges may use when a child’s best interests demand caution.

If you are facing a custody dispute where parenting time is being limited, threatened, or conditioned on therapy, understanding how Nebraska courts apply the best-interests standard is critical. The analysis below explains what happened in Trent, why the appellate court affirmed the trial judge’s decision, and what this means for parents navigating similar situations.

What legal standard governs parenting time decisions in Nebraska?

Nebraska courts decide whether to limit, supervise, or suspend parenting time by applying the “best interests of the child” standard under Nebraska’s Parenting Act. The analysis focuses on the child’s safety, emotional development, stability, health, and overall welfare, not on rewarding or punishing either parent.

Under this framework, courts evaluate the child’s relationship with each parent, the child’s wishes when based on sound reasoning, the child’s physical and emotional health, and credible evidence of abuse, neglect, or domestic violence. Nebraska appellate courts consistently emphasize that parenting time is strongly favored and should only be denied or restricted when contact would be detrimental to the child.

This presumption matters. A parent does not lose parenting time simply because the relationship is strained, because co-parenting is difficult, or because a child expresses anger. Restrictions require evidence that ordinary parenting time would place the child at risk of harm.

What happened inTrent v. Trent and why is it important?

In Trent v. Trent, the Nebraska Court of Appeals affirmed a Douglas County decree that divided custody among six children, temporarily suspended a father’s parenting time with one teenage daughter, and imposed therapy-based conditions before contact could resume  .

The case matters because it shows how Nebraska courts handle custody when multiple high-risk factors overlap. These included allegations of sexual abuse later deemed “unfounded” by investigators, claims of parental alienation, unconventional homeschooling and hygiene practices, and children who strongly rejected one parent while expressing comfort and safety with the other.

Rather than issuing a blanket ruling, the trial court made child-specific decisions. One child lived with the father by choice. Four lived with the mother. Parenting time was preserved for some children but temporarily withheld for one daughter who expressed fear and trauma related to her father. The Court of Appeals upheld that approach as a proper application of the best-interests standard.

Do unconventional parenting choices justify limiting parenting time?

Not by themselves. Nebraska courts are clear that unconventional or non-traditional parenting does not automatically make a parent unfit.

In Trent, evidence showed the mother used an “unschooling” approach, imposed few rules on hygiene or bedtime, and had not taken the children to regular medical or dental visits. While the court acknowledged these concerns, it found no evidence that the conditions were dangerous or harmful enough to justify removing custody or suspending parenting time across the board  .

Importantly, the court addressed educational concerns by giving the other parent final decision-making authority on schooling rather than changing physical custody. This reflects a common Nebraska approach: judges often resolve disputes by reallocating decision-making authority instead of restricting a parent’s time with the child.

How do abuse allegations affect parenting time when charges are unfounded?

An “unfounded” investigation does not end the court’s inquiry. Family courts are not bound by criminal or administrative findings and must independently assess what is in the child’s best interests.

In Trent, two daughters disclosed past sexual abuse after their father moved out. Investigators did not substantiate the allegations, but one daughter remained convinced she had been abused and expressed a strong, consistent desire to avoid contact. The court did not treat the allegations as proven, nor did it ignore the child’s emotional response to them. Instead, it focused on whether forcing immediate contact would be harmful.

Nebraska courts are permitted to take a child’s fear, trauma, and emotional state seriously even when allegations are disputed. The question is not whether a parent has been convicted, but whether parenting time, as structured, would be detrimental to the child.

Can a Nebraska court condition parenting time on a therapist’s recommendation?

Yes, when done correctly. Nebraska law prohibits courts from delegating custody or visitation decisions to third parties, but it allows temporary suspension or structured conditions when the court retains ultimate authority.

In Trent, the trial court suspended the father’s parenting time with one daughter until her therapist recommended contact. The decree also specified how visitation would resume, starting with supervised visits and transitioning to a standard schedule once therapeutically appropriate. The Court of Appeals held this was not an unlawful delegation because the judge, not the therapist, set the framework and retained control over future decisions  .

This distinction matters. Courts may use therapists as part of a reunification process, but they cannot give a therapist unchecked power to decide whether a parent ever sees a child again.

What does Trent teach parents in high-conflict custody cases?

The case reinforces several practical truths about Nebraska custody litigation.

Courts care deeply about credibility and consistency. Children who clearly explain their preferences, especially teenagers, are often persuasive when their reasoning aligns with observed behavior and testimony.

Judges look for tailored solutions. Rather than choosing sides, Nebraska courts frequently craft child-specific orders that reflect different needs within the same family.

Finally, appellate courts defer heavily to trial judges who hear live testimony. How parents present themselves, comply with court-ordered evaluations, and engage in therapy can matter as much as the allegations themselves.

Frequently asked questions about limiting parenting time in Nebraska

Do Nebraska courts really listen to teenagers in custody cases?

Yes. Nebraska law requires courts to consider a child’s wishes when they are based on sound reasoning. Older children who articulate clear, consistent reasons for their preferences often have significant influence.

Can my parenting time be suspended without a criminal conviction?

Yes. Parenting time decisions are civil matters based on the child’s best interests, not criminal guilt. Courts may temporarily restrict contact if they find that parenting time would be emotionally harmful.

Is homeschooling or “unschooling” a reason to lose custody?

No. Non-traditional education alone is not grounds for limiting custody or parenting time. Courts focus on whether children are safe, learning, and supported.

Can a therapist permanently decide whether I see my child?

No. A court may condition parenting time on therapeutic progress, but the judge must retain authority and define how and when visitation resumes.

What evidence matters most when parenting time is at risk?

Specific, credible evidence carries the most weight. Medical records, school records, therapy notes, evaluator testimony, and consistent documentation are far more persuasive than broad accusations or social-media narratives.

Final note for Nebraska parents

If you are facing a custody dispute where parenting time is being limited, supervised, or threatened, these cases are fact-intensive and emotionally charged. Nebraska courts do not apply shortcuts. Understanding how judges actually apply the best-interests standard can help you make smarter decisions early and avoid missteps that are difficult to undo later.