Karnataka High Court Directs Family Courts to Use 'Parenting Time' Instead of 'Visitation' Terminology

The Karnataka High Court has issued a directive requiring all Family Courts and courts handling matters under the Guardians and Wards Act to replace the term 'visitation' with 'parenting time' in judicial proceedings involving child custody and access. Justice Lalitha Kanneganti, hearing a child custody matter, observed that the language used in courts should reflect the reality that no parent is merely a visitor in a child's life, and instructed the Registrar General to ensure compliance through administrative circulars.

The directive, issued while considering Case No. WP 26703/2026, marks a deliberate shift in judicial terminology aimed at making family law proceedings more child-centric and humane. The court's reasoning centres on the premise that the word 'visitation' diminishes the parental role and fails to capture the substantive nature of a parent's relationship with their child, even when custody is held by the other parent.

Redefining Parental Language in Court Orders

Justice Kanneganti's order reflects growing judicial awareness that the language courts use in family disputes carries weight beyond mere semantics. When a court refers to a parent's time with a child as 'visitation,' it can imply a temporary, peripheral connection rather than an ongoing parental responsibility. The term 'parenting time,' by contrast, acknowledges that both parents retain their parental role and responsibilities regardless of custody arrangements.

The distinction matters in practice. A parent exercising 'visitation rights' may feel legally and emotionally positioned as an outsider accessing the child at prescribed intervals. A parent exercising 'parenting time' is framed as fulfilling a core parental function during designated periods. This linguistic shift aligns with modern family law principles that recognise both parents' continued involvement in a child's life as beneficial, even in contested custody situations.

The court's observation that 'parenting' is more humane language reflects an international trend in family law. Many jurisdictions have already made this terminological shift, recognising that language shapes perception and that judicial language should reinforce rather than undermine parental bonds. The change is particularly significant in India, where family courts handle hundreds of thousands of custody and access disputes annually.

Implementation Through Administrative Channels

To ensure the directive takes effect across the state's family court system, Justice Kanneganti instructed the Registrar General to issue formal administrative instructions and circulars. This administrative route is critical for systemic compliance. Without explicit guidance to all Family Courts, judges, and court staff, the terminology would likely persist in some courts through habit or lack of awareness.

The Registrar General's role is to translate the High Court's directive into practical court procedures. This may involve updating standard forms used in custody cases, issuing guidelines to judges about language in orders, and training court staff to use the new terminology in case management and documentation. Such administrative follow-through is essential for a directive to move from a single bench order to actual practice across dozens of courts.

Family Courts across Karnataka will be expected to adopt the new terminology in all orders, judgments, and procedural documents relating to child access. This includes interim orders, final custody decrees, and modification orders. The change will likely appear first in new orders issued after the directive is circulated, though courts may also be expected to use the terminology in ongoing cases.

Child-Centric Jurisprudence Takes Shape

The directive reflects a judicial philosophy that places the child's interests and perception at the centre of custody proceedings. Courts increasingly recognise that how they frame parental roles influences not just legal outcomes but also the emotional and psychological experience of the child. A child whose parent is described in court orders as exercising 'parenting time' receives a different message about that parent's role than one whose parent has 'visitation rights.'

This shift is consistent with principles established in Indian family law that prioritise the child's welfare as the paramount consideration. The Supreme Court and various High Courts have repeatedly held that custody arrangements must serve the best interests of the child, and that both parents should remain meaningfully involved in the child's life unless there are compelling reasons to limit contact.

The Karnataka High Court's directive also signals judicial responsiveness to evolving understanding of child psychology and development. Research in child development consistently shows that children benefit from meaningful contact with both parents after separation or divorce, and that language used in legal proceedings can affect how children perceive their relationships with each parent. By adopting terminology that reflects ongoing parental involvement, courts can better align their language with the substantive reality they are creating through custody orders.