Seattle Attorneys Blog
A Washington appeals court has confirmed that trial courts cannot order joint decision-making in a parenting plan when both parents have a history of domestic violence. In In re Marriage of Thiess, No. 87345-8-I (Wash. Ct. App. Jan. 26, 2026), Division One held that former RCW 26.09.191(1) prohibits mutual decision-making whenever at least one parent has a founded history of domestic violence — even when both parents have such findings. If you are going through a divorce or custody dispute in King County that involves domestic violence allegations, this ruling could directly affect how your parenting plan is structured.
What Did the Court Decide in Thiess?
The Court of Appeals reversed a trial court’s order requiring joint decision-making between two parents who had both been found to have committed domestic violence. The mother had a history of physical domestic violence, and the father had a history of emotional domestic violence as defined under RCW 7.105.010. Despite those findings, the trial court ordered joint decision-making, reasoning that restricting both parents did not make “common sense.”
Division One disagreed. The court held that former RCW 26.09.191(1) uses mandatory language — “shall not require mutual decision-making” — and that the statute applies when any parent has a history of domestic violence. The court remanded the case and ordered the trial court to assign sole decision-making authority to one parent.
Importantly, the court affirmed the trial court’s decision to allow equal residential time (a 50/50 week-on, week-off schedule), finding that the evidence supported the exception under former RCW 26.09.191(2)(n) because neither parent’s conduct had been shown to impact the child.
Why Does This Ruling Matter for Washington Custody Cases?
This decision clarifies a question that trial courts across Washington have wrestled with: what happens when both parents have domestic violence findings? Before Thiess, some trial courts — like the one in this case — reasoned that mutual findings essentially cancel each other out, allowing joint decision-making to proceed. The Court of Appeals has now made clear that reasoning is legally incorrect.
Under former RCW 26.09.191(1), a trial court must award sole decision-making to one parent whenever there is a domestic violence finding against any parent. The statute does not contain an exception for situations where both parents have findings. The family law attorneys at Blair & Kim handle high-conflict custody disputes involving domestic violence throughout King County, Pierce County, and Snohomish County, and this ruling reinforces the approach the firm’s attorneys have long advocated in these cases.
How Does This Affect Residential Time?
The Thiess ruling draws a clear distinction between decision-making and residential time under Washington law. While joint decision-making is flatly prohibited under former RCW 26.09.191(1) when there is a domestic violence finding, residential time restrictions operate differently.
Under former RCW 26.09.191(2), a court must limit a parent’s residential time if there is a domestic violence finding — but the statute provides an exception. The court may decline to impose residential restrictions if it finds either: (1) contact between the parent and child will not cause harm and the probability of recurring abuse is remote, or (2) the parent’s conduct did not impact the child.
In Thiess, the trial court made express findings that neither parent’s domestic violence had impacted the child, and the Court of Appeals upheld the 50/50 parenting schedule on that basis.
The practical takeaway: equal residential time remains possible even in cases with bilateral domestic violence findings, but joint decision-making is off the table.
What Should You Do If Your Case Involves Domestic Violence Findings?
If you are involved in a custody dispute where domestic violence has been alleged or found against one or both parents, Thiess has direct implications for your parenting plan. Here is what to consider:
If you are seeking sole decision-making authority: This ruling strengthens your position. If the court finds a history of domestic violence by the other parent — whether physical, emotional, or both — joint decision-making is prohibited as a matter of law. Your attorney should ensure the court makes specific findings under RCW 26.09.191(1) and orders sole decision-making to you.
If both parents have domestic violence findings: The court must still award sole decision-making to one parent. The court retains broad discretion to decide which parent receives that authority, and it may consider factors like the nature and severity of each parent’s conduct, the child’s best interests, and the overall parenting history. The court may also require the decision-making parent to provide advance notice of major decisions so the other parent can seek court intervention if needed.
If you want to preserve residential time: Even with domestic violence findings, 50/50 residential time is not automatically off the table. Your attorney will need to present evidence supporting the RCW 26.09.191(2)(n) exception — specifically, that the conduct did not impact the child or that future harm is remote.
Does This Ruling Apply to Cases Already in Progress?
The Thiess opinion was filed on January 26, 2026, and is an unpublished decision from Division One of the Washington Court of Appeals. Under Washington court rules, unpublished opinions are not binding precedent but may be cited under GR 14.1(c). The court itself cited prior unpublished decisions (In re Z.C., In re Yorks, In re Tullis) in reaching its conclusion, signaling a consistent line of appellate reasoning on this issue.
For parties with pending custody cases in King County Superior Court, Snohomish County Superior Court, or Pierce County Superior Court, this opinion provides persuasive authority that can be raised in motions and at trial. If your existing parenting plan includes joint decision-making and there are domestic violence findings, you may also have grounds to seek a modification.
Talk to a Seattle Family Law Attorney About Your Parenting Plan
Domestic violence findings create mandatory restrictions on parenting plans under Washington law, and Thiess confirms that those restrictions apply even when both parents have findings. Blair & Kim’s family law team has handled cases involving domestic violence, protection orders, and contested parenting plans across King County courts for more than two decades. The firm’s dual expertise in family law and criminal defense is particularly valuable in cases where DV allegations overlap with criminal charges and civil protection orders.
To discuss how this ruling may affect your custody case, call Blair & Kim at (206) 622-6562 or contact the firm online.