Grandparent Visitation Petition - Virginia

PETITION FOR GRANDPARENT VISITATION

(Virginia — Va. Code §§ 20-124.1 and 20-124.2)

I. PARTIES

1.1 Petitioner — Grandparent

Co-Petitioner (spouse / other grandparent), if applicable:

1.2 Respondent(s) — Parent(s) / Custodian

1.3 The Minor Child

II. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

2.1 Subject-matter jurisdiction. This Court has jurisdiction over the visitation of the minor child under Va. Code § 16.1-241(A) (J&DR district court) [or Va. Code § 20-124.2, if filed in or pending before the circuit court]. Visitation may be awarded to "any other person with a legitimate interest" under Va. Code § 20-124.2(B).

2.2 UCCJEA home state. Virginia is the home state of the child under the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act, Va. Code §§ 20-146.1 et seq., because:

☐ The child has lived in Virginia with a parent or person acting as a parent for at least six (6) consecutive months immediately before filing; or

☐ Virginia was the child's home state within six (6) months before filing and a parent or person acting as a parent continues to live in Virginia; or

☐ Other basis under Va. Code § 20-146.12: [____________]

2.3 Venue. Venue is proper in [CITY/COUNTY] because the child resides here / the Respondent(s) reside(s) here.

2.4 Other proceedings.

☐ There are no other pending or prior proceedings concerning the custody or visitation of the child.

☐ There are other proceedings — Court: [____________]; Case No.: [____________]; Nature: [____________].

III. STANDING — PERSON WITH A LEGITIMATE INTEREST

3.1 Petitioner is a grandparent of the child and therefore a "person with a legitimate interest" within Va. Code § 20-124.1, which is to be broadly construed.

3.2 Posture of the parents (determines the burden — see Section V):

☐ Both parents (an intact family) object to the requested visitation; OR

☐ A sole surviving / sole fit parent objects to the requested visitation; OR

☐ At least one parent supports / does not object to the requested visitation: [____________]

IV. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

4.1 History and nature of the relationship. Petitioner has had a significant relationship with the child, as follows:

[____________________________________________________________]

4.2 Actual harm if visitation is denied (required where a fit parent objects). If visitation is denied, the child will suffer actual harm to the child's health or welfare, as shown by the following specific facts:

[____________________________________________________________]

4.3 Circumstances of the denial. Visitation has been denied or unreasonably limited, as follows:

[____________________________________________________________]

V. CONSTITUTIONAL AND STATUTORY STANDARD

5.1 Special weight to a fit parent's decision (Troxel). Petitioner acknowledges that a fit parent has a fundamental constitutional right to make decisions concerning the care, custody, and control of the child, and that a fit parent's decision regarding visitation is entitled to special weight. Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57 (2000).

5.2 Primacy of the parent-child relationship — § 20-124.2(B). The Court shall give due regard to the primacy of the parent-child relationship and may award visitation to a person with a legitimate interest only upon a showing by clear and convincing evidence that the best interest of the child would be served thereby.

5.3 Actual-harm threshold where a fit parent objects — Williams v. Williams. Where a fit parent (both parents, or a sole surviving/sole fit parent) objects, Petitioner must satisfy a two-step test:

(1) First, the Court must find that the child will suffer actual harm to the child's health or welfare if visitation is denied; and

(2) Only then may the Court find, by clear and convincing evidence, that granting visitation is in the child's best interest.

Williams v. Williams, 256 Va. 19, 501 S.E.2d 417 (1998); Griffin v. Griffin, 41 Va. App. 77 (2003); see Williams v. Panter, Record No. 2021-23-3 (Va. Ct. App. Feb. 4, 2025).

5.4 Where a parent does not object. If a parent supports or does not object to the requested visitation, the actual-harm threshold does not apply, and Petitioner need establish only, by clear and convincing evidence, that visitation is in the child's best interest.

VI. BEST INTEREST OF THE CHILD

6.1 Petitioner alleges, and is prepared to prove by clear and convincing evidence, that the visitation requested is in the best interest of the child, considering the relevant statutory factors under Va. Code § 20-124.3, including:

☐ The age and physical and mental condition of the child and of each party;

☐ The relationship existing between the child and Petitioner, including the positive involvement with the child's life and the ability to assess and meet the child's needs;

☐ The needs of the child, including important relationships with siblings, peers, and extended family;

☐ The role Petitioner has played and will play in the upbringing and care of the child;

☐ Petitioner's propensity to support the child's relationship with the parents and to resolve disputes cooperatively;

☐ The reasonable preference of the child, if of suitable age and intelligence: [____________];

☐ Any other relevant factor: [____________]

6.2 Supporting facts:

[____________________________________________________________]

VII. PROPOSED VISITATION SCHEDULE

7.1 Regular visitation. Petitioner requests:

☐ Weekly: [____________] ☐ Monthly: [____________] ☐ Other: [____________]

7.2 Holidays and special occasions.

7.3 Telephone / electronic contact. [____________]

7.4 Transportation / exchange. [____________]

VIII. PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Petitioner respectfully requests that this Court:

A. Find that Petitioner is a person with a legitimate interest under Va. Code § 20-124.1;

B. Where a fit parent objects, find that the child will suffer actual harm to the child's health or welfare if visitation is denied, as required by Williams v. Williams;

C. Find, by clear and convincing evidence and with due regard to the primacy of the parent-child relationship, that the requested visitation is in the best interest of the child under Va. Code § 20-124.2(B);

D. Enter an order awarding Petitioner reasonable visitation with the child under the schedule in Section VII, or as the Court deems just;

E. Award costs of this action; and

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

IX. VERIFICATION

COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA )
CITY/COUNTY OF [____________] )

I, [PETITIONER NAME], being first duly sworn, state that I am the Petitioner in this action; that I have read the foregoing Petition; and that the facts stated therein are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief.

_________________________________
[PETITIONER NAME], Petitioner

Subscribed and sworn to before me this ___ day of __________, 20___.

_________________________________
Notary Public / Clerk
My Commission Expires: ___________

X. SIGNATURE

Respectfully submitted this ___ day of __________, 20___.

_________________________________
[PETITIONER NAME], Pro Se
OR
_________________________________
[ATTORNEY NAME], Virginia State Bar No. [____________]
[FIRM NAME]
[ADDRESS] | [PHONE] | [EMAIL]
Counsel for Petitioner

XI. NOTICE TO RESPONDENT

TO THE RESPONDENT(S): A Petition for Grandparent Visitation has been filed concerning the minor child named above. You will be served with a summons directing you to appear before this Court. You have the right to be represented by an attorney. If you fail to appear, the Court may proceed in your absence and enter such orders as it deems appropriate.

XII. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that on [__/__/____] a true and correct copy of the foregoing Petition (and accompanying UCCJEA affidavit) was served upon each Respondent by ☐ personal service ☐ certified mail ☐ sheriff / process server ☐ counsel of record ☐ other [____________], at the address(es) listed above.

_________________________________
[PETITIONER / ATTORNEY SIGNATURE]

SOURCES & REFERENCES

• Va. Code § 20-124.2(B) — custody and visitation; "due regard to the primacy of the parent-child relationship"; clear-and-convincing standard to award visitation to a person with a legitimate interest. Subsection B2 (deceased/incapacitated parent's consent) — held unconstitutional as applied against a surviving fit parent in Williams v. Panter, Record No. 2021-23-3 (Va. Ct. App. Feb. 4, 2025), for omitting the actual-harm requirement.
• Va. Code § 20-124.1 — "person with a legitimate interest" broadly construed (grandparents, stepgrandparents, stepparents, former stepparents, blood relatives, family members).
• Va. Code § 20-124.3 — best-interests factors.
• Va. Code § 16.1-241(A) — J&DR district court jurisdiction over visitation; §§ 20-146.1 et seq. — UCCJEA (§ 20-146.20 affidavit).
• Williams v. Williams, 256 Va. 19, 501 S.E.2d 417 (1998) — two-step actual-harm test where a fit parent objects: actual harm to the child first, then clear-and-convincing best interest.
• Griffin v. Griffin, 41 Va. App. 77 (2003) — "actual harm" is more than the obvious benefit of continued emotional attachment.
• Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57 (2000) — a fit parent's decision is entitled to special weight.

This Petition is a preparation aid only. Virginia grandparent visitation imposes a high, constitutionally sensitive burden where a fit parent objects: under Williams v. Williams the grandparent must first prove the child will suffer ACTUAL HARM if visitation is denied, then show by clear and convincing evidence that visitation is in the child's best interest. Consult a licensed Virginia family law attorney before filing.