Family Law - Denial or Interference With Visitation Rights
Summary
HB481 amends Maryland family law governing custody and visitation enforcement. The bill requires a court, when it finds that a party has unjustifiably denied or interfered with court-ordered visitation, to order make-up visitation rather than merely allowing the court to do so. The required make-up time must be of the same type as the missed visitation, double the duration of the denied time, scheduled at a time chosen by the other party, and completed within two years of the court’s finding, all in a manner consistent with the child’s best interests.
The bill also preserves other remedies a court may use in these cases. In addition to the mandatory make-up visitation, the court may modify the custody or visitation order to add terms or conditions to promote future compliance, and may assess costs or counsel fees against the party who interfered with visitation. The bill amends Section 9-105 of the Family Law Article and takes effect October 1, 2026.
Impact
HB481 changes the discretion currently available to Maryland courts by making make-up visitation mandatory when unjustified denial or interference is found, rather than optional. It strengthens enforcement of visitation orders and affects parents or other parties subject to custody and visitation orders, while still requiring courts to act consistently with the child’s best interests. The bill amends Maryland Code, Family Law § 9-105, and adds specific timing and scheduling requirements for remedial visitation.
Sentiment
No committee transcripts or recorded votes were provided, so there is no direct evidence of support or opposition in the available materials. Based on the bill text, the measure appears aimed at strengthening compliance with visitation orders and providing a clearer remedy for denied parenting time, which may appeal to advocates for enforcement of parental access rights. At the same time, the best-interests limitation suggests an effort to preserve judicial flexibility in family cases.
Contention
The main point of contention is the shift from permissive to mandatory make-up visitation. Supporters are likely to favor the bill because it creates a stronger remedy for parents whose visitation is wrongfully denied and reduces judicial inconsistency. Opponents may argue that requiring double make-up time and tying the schedule to the other party’s choice could be too rigid in some family situations, potentially limiting a court’s ability to tailor relief to the child’s circumstances. The bill’s continued reference to the child’s best interests is the primary safeguard against that concern.