No. Montana law does not presume that parents share time equally, and it does not set any default parenting schedule. What the statute does say is that frequent and continuing contact with both parents is considered to be in a child's best interests. Those are two different statements, and it is easy to confuse them. This page is part of our Montana Divorce Guide.
What the Statute Says
The governing section is MCA § 40-4-212. Its first sentence is the whole standard: "The court shall determine the parenting plan in accordance with the best interest of the child." The court then considers all relevant parenting factors, thirteen of which are listed.
One of those factors, (1)(l), reads: "whether the child has frequent and continuing contact with both parents, which is considered to be in the child's best interests unless the court determines, after a hearing, that contact with a parent would be detrimental to the child's best interests."
That is a strong statement in favor of both parents staying involved. It sits in a list of factors, next to continuity and stability of care, the child's adjustment to home and school, and the child's developmental needs. The statute does not tell the court to rank it above the others.
What the Statute Does Not Say
| Question | In the text? | MCA |
|---|---|---|
| The plan is set by the child's best interest | Yes | § 40-4-212(1) |
| Frequent and continuing contact with both parents is considered to be in the child's best interests | Yes, unless a court finds after a hearing that contact with a parent would be detrimental | § 40-4-212(1)(l) |
| Equal or 50/50 time is presumed | No. The words do not appear | §§ 40-4-212, 40-4-234 |
| A minimum share of time for each parent | No. No percentage or number of days appears | §§ 40-4-212, 40-4-234 |
| A preference for either parent based on sex | No. The text refers only to a parent or parents | § 40-4-212(1) |
| A residential schedule as part of the plan | Yes. It is a listed plan provision, with no particular division of time specified | § 40-4-234(2)(c) |
"Frequent and continuing contact" is not defined in the section. It does not say how many overnights, and it does not say the contact must be equal. A schedule in which a child lives mainly with one parent and sees the other often can satisfy those words. So can an equal schedule.
The Presumptions That Are in the Statute
Section 40-4-212 does contain rebuttable presumptions, in subsection (4), and it helps to know what they are so they are not mistaken for something else. Both are about litigation conduct. A parenting plan action brought by a parent within 6 months after a child support action against that parent is presumed vexatious. So is a motion to amend a final plan by a parent who has not made a good faith effort to comply with the plan or its dispute resolution provisions.
A separate statute tells the court to presume a parent is not acting in the child's best interest if the parent has willfully and consistently refused to allow, or tried to frustrate, the child's contact with the other parent (MCA § 40-4-219(1)(a)(iv), (3)). None of these presumptions is about how to divide time in a first parenting plan.
Has the Law Changed Recently?
You may have heard that Montana adopted, or is about to adopt, an equal parenting presumption. The text is the place to check. As of the 2025 Montana Code Annotated, the history note for MCA § 40-4-212 shows its most recent amendment was in 2009, and the same is true of the final parenting plan statute, MCA § 40-4-234. Neither contains an equal-time presumption.
Legislatures do revisit this subject. If you read about a new bill, look for whether it passed and what its effective date is before relying on it.
How Equal Schedules Happen in Practice
An equal schedule is always available by agreement. Each parent, or both jointly, must submit a proposed final parenting plan (MCA § 40-4-234(1)), and parents who agree on a week on, week off or similar rotation can propose it together. Parenting schedules by age describes the common patterns.
When parents do not agree, each proposes a schedule and the court chooses or writes one using the best interest factors. The result depends on the facts: how far apart the homes are, what the child is used to, each parent's work hours, the child's age and needs, and any safety concerns. The statute leaves that judgment to the court, and outcomes vary from family to family.
When Contact Would Be Harmful
The statement in favor of contact with both parents has a built-in exception. It does not apply if the court determines, after a hearing, that contact with a parent would be detrimental to the child. In making that determination the court must consider evidence of physical abuse or threat of physical abuse by one parent against the other parent or the child, including certain criminal convictions of a parent or a person living in that parent's household (MCA § 40-4-212(1)(l)).
If you are in danger, call 911. The National Domestic Violence Hotline is 1-800-799-7233. Our Montana Domestic Violence Guide explains orders of protection and how they interact with a parenting case.
What This Means for Your Proposal
Because no schedule is presumed, the plan you propose should be one you can explain in terms of your child rather than in terms of fairness between adults. That is true whether you want equal time, more, or less. For the pieces a plan needs beyond the schedule, see what a parenting plan must include, and for the overview, parenting plans in Montana. A&M Law works with parents in contested cases and through its Cooperative Family Law process.
This page explains Montana law in general as of the 2025 Montana Code Annotated. It is not legal advice about your specific case.