When Michigan’s family courts decide child custody, the controlling question is always which arrangement serves the child’s best interests. Under our Child Custody Act, judges must evaluate the statutory best-interest “best interest factors” found in MCL 722.23 before entering a custody order. Two of the most significant factors are MCL 722.23(d) and MCL 722.23(e), both of which focus on the child’s need for a stable and lasting home. Although these factors are closely related, they address different issues. Factor (d) examines whether the child has been living in a stable, satisfactory environment and whether maintaining continuity is important. Factor (e) considers the permanence of the existing or proposed custodial home as a family unit. Together, these factors help the court determine whether a custody arrangement will provide the consistency and security children need to thrive.
What Is MCL 722.23(d)? This child custody factor requires the court to consider:
“The length of time the child has lived in a stable, satisfactory environment, and the desirability of maintaining continuity.”This factor recognizes that children generally benefit from consistency in their daily lives. Stability often includes familiar routines, regular school attendance, established friendships, consistent parenting, and a home environment that meets the child’s emotional, educational, and physical needs.However, the length of time a child has lived in one home is not the only consideration. Simply being the child’s primary caregiver for several years does not automatically favor one parent. The court must determine whether the environment has actually been stable and satisfactory.Michigan appellate courts have repeatedly explained that the quality of the child’s existing environment matters just as much as its duration. If the evidence shows the child’s current living situation has been unstable, chaotic, or otherwise not in the child’s best interests, the court may determine that factor (d) does not favor maintaining the existing arrangement.
Stability Means More Than Living in the Same House
Many parents mistakenly believe factor (d) is simply about who has had the child longer. Michigan custody judges look much deeper than that.Evidence commonly considered under this factor includes:The child’s residential history.The consistency of each parent’s caregiving.School attendance and academic stability.Participation in extracurricular activities.Relationships with siblings and extended family.Whether the child has experienced frequent moves.The effect a proposed custody change would have on the child’s established routine.When a proposed custody change would require changing schools, neighborhoods, or other important aspects of the child’s daily life, the court carefully evaluates whether those disruptions are justified by the evidence.
Educational Stability Can Be an Important Consideration
School continuity is often an important part of factor (d). Michigan courts recognize that a child’s educational environment can be an important component of overall stability.When custody disputes involve changing school districts or relocating a child, the court generally examines how well the child is doing in the current educational setting, whether the proposed change would interrupt an established routine, and whether the move would promote or undermine the child’s overall best interests.Rather than comparing schools in the abstract, courts focus on the child’s actual educational experience and how a proposed change would affect that experience.
What Is MCL 722.23(e)? This factor requires the court to consider:
“The permanence, as a family unit, of the existing or proposed custodial home or homes.”Unlike factor (d), this provision does not focus on how long the child has lived somewhere. Instead, it examines whether the child’s home life is likely to remain stable and enduring in the future.The emphasis is on permanence—not on which parent owns a larger house, has newer furniture, or provides more material advantages.Michigan appellate decisions have consistently recognized that factor (e) concerns the stability and permanence of the family unit itself. Questions involving the safety or quality of the home are generally evaluated under other statutory best-interest factors rather than factor (e).
What Does “Permanence as a Family Unit” Mean?
Every family looks different. Michigan law does not require a traditional two-parent household, nor does it favor one parent based on marital status alone. Instead, the court examines whether the child’s household is likely to provide long-term consistency.Relevant considerations may include:The stability of the child’s living arrangements.Whether household members change frequently.The likelihood that the child will continue living in the same family structure.Whether the proposed custodial home appears stable over time.The family court is evaluating the reliability of the family environment—not whether one household appears more attractive or financially comfortable than another.
How Factors (d) and (e) Work Together
Although factors (d) and (e) often overlap, they are separate legal considerations.Factor (d) looks primarily at the child’s established environment and whether continuity should be preserved.Factor (e) looks forward by evaluating the permanence of the custodial home as a family unit.Because they address different issues, one parent may prevail under factor (d) while the other prevails under factor (e). The family court judge weighs all relevant evidence before determining which custody arrangement serves the child’s best interests.
Evidence That Can Influence These Factors
Strong evidence under MCL 722.23(d) and (e) usually comes from everyday life rather than dramatic events.Examples include:Parenting schedules that have been consistently followed.School and attendance records.Medical and counseling records.Testimony regarding each parent’s caregiving responsibilities.Housing history.Evidence concerning the child’s daily routine.The stability of each parent’s household.The child’s involvement in school, sports, religious activities, and community life.Michigan custody cases are fact-intensive. Courts focus on objective evidence demonstrating how each proposed custody arrangement will affect the child’s long-term stability.
Every Best-Interest Factor Matters
Neither factor (d) nor factor (e) determines the outcome of a Michigan custody case by itself.Under the Michigan Child Custody Act, the court must evaluate every relevant best-interest factor in MCL 722.23. Some factors may carry greater weight than others depending on the evidence presented. Ultimately, the judge considers the entire record before deciding what custody arrangement is in the child’s best interests.For that reason, parents should not focus on only one or two statutory factors. A successful custody case requires presenting clear, credible evidence addressing the complete best-interest analysis.
Frequently Asked Questions
What does MCL 722.23(d) mean?
MCL 722.23(d) requires Michigan courts to consider how long the child has lived in a stable, satisfactory environment and whether maintaining continuity serves the child’s best interests. The family court judge evaluates both the quality and the duration of the child’s existing environment.
What does MCL 722.23(e) mean?
MCL 722.23(e) focuses on the permanence of the existing or proposed custodial home as a family unit. Michigan judges must evaluate whether the child’s household is likely to provide long-term stability rather than comparing which parent has the better home.
Does living with one parent for many years automatically win factor (d)?
No. The court considers both the length of time and whether the child’s environment has actually been stable and satisfactory. Longevity alone does not determine the outcome.
Does factor (e) require a married or two-parent household?
No. Michigan law does not require a particular family structure. The court evaluates the permanence and stability of the child’s actual living arrangement.
Can factors (d) and (e) determine custody by themselves?
No. Michigan judges must consider all relevant best-interest factors under MCL 722.23. Factors (d) and (e) are important, but they are only part of the court’s overall custody analysis.
Why are these factors important in custody modification cases?
When a parent seeks to change custody, parenting time, relocate with a child, or change schools, factors involving continuity, stability, and the permanence of the child’s home often become significant parts of the court’s best-interest analysis.
Understanding MCL 722.23(d) and (e) in Michigan Custody Cases
Michigan custody disputes often turn on a simple question: which home gives the child the steadiest life? MCL 722.23(d) and (e) are two of the best-interest factors judges use to answer that question. Factor (d) looks at the child’s stability and continuity. Factor (e) looks at whether the existing or proposed home functions as a lasting family unit. Together, they focus on the child’s real day-to-day life, not just what either parent says the child should have.
Michigan courts must consider the statutory best-interest factors in custody cases, and the trial court must make findings on the relevant factors. The court is not required to treat every factor the same way or give every factor equal weight; instead, it must decide custody based on the evidence presented and the child’s best interests as a whole.
What MCL 722.23(d) Means
Factor (d) asks whether the child has lived in a stable, satisfactory environment long enough that continuity matters. The point is not simply how long a child has been somewhere. A long stay in one home or with one parent does not automatically favor that parent if the environment has not actually been satisfactory. In Brown, the Court of Appeals held that factor (d) still weighed against the parent who had been the primary caregiver because the care was not satisfactory, and the court also noted that a later move would have forced another school and church change, which reduced the children’s overall stability.
Pierron shows that factor (d) can matter in school-related custody disputes too. There, the Court of Appeals explained that a court considering a proposed school change could look to the educational environment the children already had and whether that environment was stable and satisfactory. The court also emphasized that the judge should focus on the actual school environment that exists, not just on which school district looks better in the abstract.
For parents, the practical takeaway is straightforward: factor (d) is about the child’s lived routine. Judges look closely at continuity in school, home life, caregiving patterns, and whether a proposed change would disrupt a structure that is already working. A parent who has provided long-term care can do well under this factor, but only if the court concludes that the environment has truly been stable and satisfactory.
What MCL 722.23(e) Means
Factor (e) is different. It does not ask which parent has the nicer house or the more comfortable setup. It asks about the permanence of the custodial home as a family unit. Brown explains that the focus is permanence, not acceptability, and that safety or quality concerns belong in other best-interest factors rather than factor (e) itself.
That distinction matters. A parent cannot turn factor (e) into a general comparison of which home seems more appealing. Michigan appellate courts have repeatedly treated factor (e) as a question about whether the child’s family structure is likely to stay intact. In Brown, the court looked at the children’s consistent residence with one parent and spouse, contrasted with the other parent’s more uncertain living situation, and held that the trial court clearly erred when it treated factor (e) as if it were about the acceptability of one home over another.
In plain English, factor (e) asks whether the child is likely to have a durable home life or a household that keeps shifting. That can include changes in where the child lives, who lives in the home, and whether the family structure appears likely to remain stable. The court is not deciding whether one household is perfect. It is deciding whether the child’s family unit is likely to remain steady enough to support the child’s best interests.
Why Factors (d) and (e) Often Matter Together
These two factors often overlap, but they are not the same. Factor (d) focuses on the child’s stability and continuity in the environment the child already knows. Factor (e) focuses on the permanence of the household structure the child would live in going forward. In practice, a judge may find that a child has been living in a stable setting under factor (d), while also finding under factor (e) that one proposed home is more permanent than the other, or vice versa.
These factors can become especially important when a parent wants to relocate, change schools, or alter the child’s routine in a major way. Pierron is a good example of how Michigan courts analyze those disputes. The court looked at the existing educational environment, whether the proposed change would disturb that environment, and whether the family and school structure would remain sufficiently stable.
What Evidence Usually Matters
In a custody case, the evidence under factors (d) and (e) usually comes from the details of everyday life. That can include where the child has been living, how long the child has been there, whether the child has changed schools or homes recently, what the parenting schedule actually looks like, and how stable each proposed household appears to be. Michigan judges are deciding real-world stability, so the best evidence is usually concrete and specific.
Parents often focus on what they believe is “best” in a general sense. Michigan law asks for something more grounded than that. The court wants to know what the child’s actual environment has been, whether it has been working, and whether the proposed arrangement will provide the kind of permanence and continuity a child needs.
FAQ
What does MCL 722.23(d) mean in a Michigan custody case?
Factor (d) asks how long the child has lived in a stable, satisfactory environment and whether continuity should be maintained. A long-term arrangement helps only if the environment has truly been stable and satisfactory.
What does MCL 722.23(e) mean?
Factor (e) looks at the permanence of the existing or proposed custodial home as a family unit. The judge is not supposed to compare which home is more attractive or more comfortable under this factor.
Can a parent lose factor (d) even after caring for the child for years?
Yes. A long caregiving history does not automatically win factor (d) if the court concludes the environment was not satisfactory or that the child’s stability would be reduced by the proposed change. Brown is a good example of that analysis.
Does factor (e) require a two-parent household?
No. Factor (e) is about permanence and whether the home will remain intact as a family unit. The court looks at the stability of the actual arrangement, not at some idealized household model.
Do factors (d) and (e) decide custody by themselves?
No. Michigan courts must consider all of the best-interest factors, and the court makes its decision based on the total picture. Factors (d) and (e) can be important, but they are only part of the full custody analysis.