Michigan already has active bills for 50/50 custody, however they have not passed into law, yet.
Michigan’s pending 50/50 custody bills (House Bills 5211-5213 and identical Senate companions 940-942) would create a rebuttable presumption of equal or approximately equal parenting time as the starting point in parent-vs-parent custody disputes.
Exact provisions (from introduced text of HB 5211, the lead bill):
- Presumption language (added to MCL 722.23 & 722.25): “If a child custody dispute is between the parents, there is a presumption that it is in the best interests of the child to award equal or approximately equal parenting time to each parent. The presumption may be rebutted only by clear and convincing evidence placed on the record that equal or approximately equal parenting time is not in the best interests of the child."
- Courts must issue **written findings of fact and conclusions of law** on best interests in all cases.
- Minor updates to best-interest factors and stronger protections in cases involving certain sexual offenses.
- HB 5212 / SB 941: Requires courts to formally notify parties in paternity, custody, divorce (with minor child), or support cases about the equal-parenting presumption and joint-custody option.
- HB 5213 / SB 942: Requires every Friend of the Court office to include the presumption in all informational materials they produce.
Status (as of May 4, 2026):
- House bills (introduced Nov. 4, 2025 by Rep. Gina Johnsen (R) + bipartisan cosponsors): Referred to House Judiciary Committee; public hearing held April 29-30, 2026. Still in committee—no vote.
- Senate bills (introduced April 29, 2026 by Sen. Jim Runestad (R)): Referred to Senate Committee on Civil Rights, Judiciary, and Public Safety. Still in committee.
Full texts and latest status are at legislature.mi.gov (search HB 5211 or SB 940). These have not passed and are not law.
Are you from Michigan? Join the fight and sign the petition!
Michigan 50/50 Custody Petition
Parental Alienation
Although Parental Alienation is recognized in all 50 States there is no specific statue that explicitly criminalizes Parental Alienation or titles a law after it.
Even though the State recognizes Parental Alienation does not mean that the Judge will.
In my case, Parental Alienation was recognized by my counselor, a licensed Psychologist with a PhD, who counseled both me and my girls. My counselor stated this on the record with a written letter to the court. I brought Parental Alienation up in a hearing. The Judge ignored it. The Judge said that my counselor was not qualified to determine Parental Alienation.
The Judge is an elected Judge with an attorney education. The Judge is not a doctor. My counselor is a licensed Psychologist with a PhD. My counselor is a doctor. My counselor is qualified to determine Parental Alienation. The Judge is not.
This is not right. This needs to change. There must be a law to force a Judge to accept the recommendation from a licensed doctor.
Join this fight! Help make this a law! Sign the Petition!
Michigan Parental Alienation
A bill to amend 1970 PA 91, entitled
"Child Custody Act of 1970,"
by amending section 3 (MCL 722.23), and by adding sections 2a and 3a.
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN ENACT:
Sec. 2a. As used in this act, "parental alienating behaviors" means a documented pattern of conduct by one parent that is intended to, or has the effect of, damaging or destroying the child's relationship with the other parent. This includes, but is not limited to, any of the following:
(a) Badmouthing, denigrating, or making false statements about the other parent to the child.
(b) Limiting, interfering with, or obstructing the child's contact, communication, or relationship with the other parent without reasonable justification.
(c) Making or encouraging false allegations of abuse, neglect, or domestic violence against the other parent.
(d) Undermining the other parent's authority, role, or involvement in the child's life.
(e) Other behaviors that cause the child to fear, reject, or show unwarranted hostility toward the other parent.
This term does not include reasonable actions taken by a parent to protect the child or themselves from abuse, neglect, or domestic violence.
Sec. 3. As used in this act, "best interests of the child" means the sum total of the following factors to be considered, evaluated, and determined by the court:
[Keep (a) through (i) unchanged]
(j) 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, including the absence or presence of parental alienating behaviors as defined in section 2a. A court may not consider negatively for the purposes of this factor any reasonable action taken by a parent to protect a child or that parent from sexual assault or domestic violence by the child's other parent.
[Keep (k) and (l) unchanged]
NEW SECTION. Sec. 3a.
(1) If the court finds by clear and convincing evidence that a parent has engaged in parental alienating behaviors, there is a rebuttable presumption that it is not in the best interests of the child to award that parent primary physical custody or unsupervised parenting time until the behaviors are addressed through court-ordered intervention.
(2) The court may order counseling, parenting education, or other therapeutic measures designed to restore the parent-child relationship and may award reasonable attorney fees and costs to the targeted parent.
(3) This section shall be construed in a manner consistent with the safety and welfare of the child and does not limit the court's ability to consider evidence of domestic violence or child abuse under section 3(k).