Grandparent Visitation Petition - Indiana

PETITION FOR GRANDPARENT VISITATION — INDIANA

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Caption
2. Parties
3. Jurisdiction and Venue (UCCJA)
4. Standing — Ind. Code § 31-17-5-1
5. Factual Allegations
6. Constitutional and Statutory Standard
7. The Four Required Factors (M.L.B. / McCune)
8. Requested Visitation Schedule
9. Prayer for Relief
10. Verification
11. Signature
12. Notice and Certificate of Service
13. Sources and References

1. CAPTION

IN THE [____________] ☐ CIRCUIT ☐ SUPERIOR ☐ PROBATE COURT

[____________] COUNTY, STATE OF INDIANA

Cause No. [________________________________]

VERIFIED PETITION FOR GRANDPARENT VISITATION

Petitioner, [PETITIONER NAME], by [counsel / pro se], petitions this Court under Ind. Code § 31-17-5 et seq. for an order of visitation with the above-named minor child, and in support alleges as follows:

2. PARTIES

2.1. Petitioner [PETITIONER NAME] ("Petitioner") is an adult resident of [COUNTY], Indiana, and is the:

☐ Maternal grandparent ☐ Paternal grandparent

of the minor child named below. [NOTE: The Indiana Grandparent Visitation Act extends standing to grandparents only; it does NOT authorize great-grandparents or other relatives.]

2.2. Co-Petitioner [CO-PETITIONER NAME] (if any) is the spouse of Petitioner and the other grandparent of the child.

2.3. Respondent [PARENT NAME] is the ☐ mother ☐ father ☐ surviving parent ☐ custodian of the child and resides at [ADDRESS].

2.4. The minor child who is the subject of this Petition is:

3. JURISDICTION AND VENUE (UCCJA)

3.1. Subject-matter jurisdiction (UCCJA). This Court has jurisdiction to determine visitation under the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act, Ind. Code § 31-21, because Indiana is the child's "home state" — the child has lived in Indiana with a parent or person acting as a parent for at least six (6) consecutive months immediately before commencement of this proceeding (or since birth, if under six months). ☐ Yes ☐ Other UCCJA basis: [SPECIFY].

3.2. Venue. Venue is proper in this county under Ind. Code § 31-17-5-4 because:

☐ A court of this county has issued a decree of dissolution of the marriage of the child's parents (file the petition in that court / cause)

☐ A parent of the child is deceased, or the child was born out of wedlock, and the child resides in this county (file in the circuit, superior, or probate court)

3.3. Related proceeding. ☐ No related proceeding is pending. ☐ This Petition relates to / is filed within Cause No. [____] (dissolution / paternity).

3.4. A UCCJA/UCCJEA affidavit of the child's residences and any other proceedings is filed concurrently or attached as Exhibit [____].

4. STANDING — Ind. Code § 31-17-5-1

STANDING IS A STRICT THRESHOLD. The Grandparent Visitation Act is in derogation of the
common law and is strictly construed. A grandparent may seek visitation only if one of
the three statutory triggers in ¶ 4.1 exists. In re Guardianship of A.J.A., 991 N.E.2d 110
(Ind. 2013) (incarceration of a parent does not equal "deceased"; murder of one parent does not
"dissolve" the marriage for standing purposes).

4.1. Statutory trigger (check the applicable basis — Ind. Code § 31-17-5-1(a)):

☐ The child's parent is deceased (Petitioner is a parent of the deceased parent or the surviving family line, as applicable)

☐ The marriage of the child's parents has been dissolved in Indiana (or dissolved in another state — see Ind. Code § 31-17-5-10)

☐ The child was born out of wedlock

4.2. Paternity condition (paternal grandparents only). If standing is based on the child's birth out of wedlock and Petitioner is a paternal grandparent, the child's father has established paternity in relation to the child. ☐ Paternity established on [__/__/____] in Cause No. [____]. (Ind. Code § 31-17-5-1(b).)

4.3. Intact-family bar acknowledged. Petitioner acknowledges that standing does not exist where the child's parents are alive, married to each other, and the nuclear family remains intact. In re Visitation of J.P.H., 709 N.E.2d 44 (Ind. Ct. App. 1999).

5. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

5.1. History of the relationship. Petitioner has had an established and meaningful relationship with the child since [DATE / BIRTH], including: [DESCRIBE — frequency of contact, caregiving, overnights, holidays, financial support, activities].

5.2. Meaningful contact. Petitioner has had, or has attempted to have, meaningful contact with the child as follows: [DESCRIBE]. (Ind. Code § 31-17-5-2(b).)

5.3. Denial or limitation of contact. On or about [__/__/____], the Respondent [denied / limited] Petitioner's contact with the child. Describe whether contact was denied entirely or merely limited, and the reasons given: [DESCRIBE].

5.4. Good-faith efforts. Petitioner has attempted in good faith to maintain the relationship and resolve the matter informally and/or through mediation by: [DESCRIBE].

5.5. Child's circumstances. The child is [AGE] years old. The Court may interview the child in chambers to assess the child's perception of whether visitation is in the child's best interests. (Ind. Code § 31-17-5-2(c)–(d).)

6. CONSTITUTIONAL AND STATUTORY STANDARD

6.1. Fundamental parental rights — special weight. Petitioner acknowledges that a fit parent has a fundamental constitutional right to direct the upbringing of the child, and that the court must give "special weight" to a fit parent's decision regarding grandparent visitation. Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57 (2000); In re Visitation of M.L.B., 983 N.E.2d 583 (Ind. 2013).

6.2. Presumption and heightened burden. There is a presumption that a fit parent's decision about grandparent visitation is in the child's best interests, which places the burden of proof on Petitioner; Petitioner must rebut that presumption by a heightened standard of proof. M.L.B., 983 N.E.2d at 586.

6.3. Required findings. Petitioner acknowledges that any visitation decree must contain written findings of fact and conclusions of law addressing each of the four factors set out in Section 7. Ind. Code § 31-17-5-6; M.L.B., 983 N.E.2d at 586.

7. THE FOUR REQUIRED FACTORS (M.L.B. / McCune)

A grandparent-visitation order must address all four of the following factors in its findings and conclusions. In re Visitation of M.L.B., 983 N.E.2d 583, 586 (Ind. 2013), adopting McCune v. Frey, 783 N.E.2d 752, 757–59 (Ind. Ct. App. 2003). Petitioner addresses them as follows:

7.1. Factor 1 — Presumption that a fit parent's decision is in the child's best interests (burden on Petitioner). Petitioner recognizes this presumption and undertakes the burden to overcome it: [DESCRIBE basis].

7.2. Factor 2 — "Special weight" given to a fit parent's decision (heightened standard of proof to rebut the presumption). Petitioner alleges the following facts justify overriding the parent's decision: [DESCRIBE].

7.3. Factor 3 — "Some weight" given to whether the parent denied visitation entirely or merely limited it. ☐ The parent denied visitation entirely, so the very existence of the child-grandparent relationship is at stake. ☐ The parent limited visitation, so the issue is only the appropriate amount. The prior pattern of visitation was: [DESCRIBE].

7.4. Factor 4 — Whether visitation is in the child's best interests (Ind. Code § 31-17-5-2), considering whether Petitioner has had or attempted meaningful contact with the child. Petitioner alleges: [DESCRIBE — bond, prior contact, benefit to the child, absence of risk].

8. REQUESTED VISITATION SCHEDULE

8.1. In-person visitation: ☐ Weekly [DAYS/TIMES] ☐ Monthly [SPECIFY] ☐ Other [SPECIFY] (consistent with the parties' prior pattern, per Factor 3).

8.2. Holidays and special occasions:

8.3. Telephone/electronic contact: ☐ Telephone [FREQUENCY] ☐ Video [FREQUENCY] ☐ Mail/cards.

8.4. Transportation and exchange: Petitioner proposes [EXCHANGE LOCATION / WHO TRANSPORTS].

9. PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Petitioner respectfully requests that this Court:

A. Find that Petitioner has standing under Ind. Code § 31-17-5-1;

B. Find, in written findings of fact and conclusions of law addressing each of the four M.L.B. factors, that Petitioner has overcome the fit-parent presumption by the applicable heightened standard;

C. Enter a decree granting Petitioner reasonable visitation substantially as set forth in Section 8, narrowly tailored consistent with Troxel and the parties' prior pattern of contact;

D. Provide for telephonic and electronic contact;

E. Retain jurisdiction to modify the order under Ind. Code § 31-17-5-7 upon a showing of changed circumstances; and

F. Grant such other relief as the Court deems just and proper.

10. VERIFICATION

I, [PETITIONER NAME], affirm under the penalties for perjury that I am the Petitioner, that I have read the foregoing Verified Petition, and that the facts stated in it are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief.

Dated: [__/__/____]

Signature: ___________________________________

Printed name: [PETITIONER NAME]

11. SIGNATURE

Respectfully submitted this [____] day of [MONTH], [YEAR].

___________________________________
[ATTORNEY NAME OR PRO SE PETITIONER]
Indiana Atty. No. [____] (if attorney)
[FIRM NAME]
[ADDRESS]
[PHONE] | [EMAIL]
Attorney for Petitioner / Petitioner Pro Se

12. NOTICE AND CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

TO RESPONDENT(S): You have been served with a Verified Petition for Grandparent Visitation and summons under Ind. Code § 31-17-5-5. You have the right to file a written response within the time allowed by the Indiana Rules of Trial Procedure, to appear at any hearing, to be represented by an attorney, and to present evidence. Failure to respond may result in the Court granting the relief requested.

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE. I certify that on [__/__/____] a true and correct copy of this Petition and summons was served on the following by the method indicated:

Signature: ___________________________________

13. SOURCES AND REFERENCES

• Ind. Code § 31-17-5 (Grandparent's Visitation, Chapter 5): https://iga.in.gov/ic/2025/Title_31/Article_17/Chapter_5.pdf
• Ind. Code § 31-17-5-1 (right to seek visitation; standing): https://codes.findlaw.com/in/title-31-family-law-and-juvenile-law/in-code-sect-31-17-5-1/
• Ind. Code § 31-17-5-2 (best interest; in-chambers interview); § 31-17-5-3 (petition); § 31-17-5-4 (venue); § 31-17-5-6 (decree; findings); § 31-17-5-7 (modification); § 31-17-5-10 (out-of-state dissolution)
• In re Visitation of M.L.B., 983 N.E.2d 583 (Ind. 2013) (four required factors must appear in findings): https://kidsvoicein.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/In-Re-Visitation-of-M.L.B-983-N.E.2d-583-Ind.-2013.pdf
• McCune v. Frey, 783 N.E.2d 752 (Ind. Ct. App. 2003) (origin of the four factors)
• In re Guardianship of A.J.A., 991 N.E.2d 110 (Ind. 2013) (strict construction of standing triggers)
• Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57 (2000) (fundamental parental rights; "special weight")
• Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act, Ind. Code § 31-21