Kansas Grandparents' Rights: The 2024 Nonparent Visitation Law

Kansas completely rebuilt its law on grandparent contact in 2024, replacing an older, grandparent-specific statute with a broader "nonparent visitation" framework that covers grandparents alongside other close relatives. If you have read anything about Kansas grandparent visitation from before mid-2024, treat it as describing a law that no longer applies. This page explains the current statute, effective since July 1, 2024.

Statute text verified live against the official Kansas Statutes: K.S.A. 23-3306, 23-3307, 23-3308, 23-3309, and 23-3311 on 2026-09-02; K.S.A. 38-2286 and 59-2118 on 2026-08-12. This article has not yet been reviewed by a licensed attorney.

The Fit-Parent Presumption Comes First

Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57 (2000), requires that a fit parent's decision receive at least some special weight from a reviewing court. Kansas's 2024 recodification writes that requirement directly into the statute rather than leaving it to constitutional argument.

K.S.A. 23-3309(a) provides that in an initial proceeding under the act, there is a rebuttable presumption that a decision by a parent or person acting as a parent regarding a request for visitation by a nonparent is in the best interest of the child. The parent's answer, in other words, is where the court starts.

K.S.A. 23-3309(b) then sets the burden of proof. The nonparent has the burden to rebut that presumption by clear and convincing evidence of the facts required by K.S.A. 23-3308(a). Clear and convincing evidence is a demanding standard, well above the preponderance standard that governs most civil disputes, so a close case is one the parent wins. The same subsection adds an important limit in the grandparent's favor: proof of unfitness of a parent or person acting as a parent is not required to rebut the presumption, so a grandparent does not have to accuse the parent of being unfit in order to bring a case.

Kansas builds further substance into Troxel by demanding proof of actual harm to the child, not merely a best-interest finding, before visitation can be ordered over a parent's objection.

What the Statute Requires: A Relationship Test, Not a Life-Event Trigger

K.S.A. 23-3308 is titled "Requirements for order of visitation," and that title is precise. It is the substantive test a court applies before it may order visitation, not a standing screen that merely gets a petitioner through the courthouse door. What a petition must contain is set out separately, in K.S.A. 23-3311, which requires a verified petition sworn under penalty of perjury that alleges specific facts about the relationship.

The statute does not require a divorce, a parent's death, or incarceration before a nonparent, including a grandparent, may seek visitation. Instead the test turns on one of two factual relationship routes, and both are conjunctive: every listed element has to be present.

The consistent-caretaker route is K.S.A. 23-3308(b). The nonparent must, without expectation of compensation, have lived with the child for not less than 12 months, unless the court finds good cause to accept a shorter period; have regularly exercised care of the child; have made day-to-day decisions regarding the child solely or in cooperation with an individual having physical custody; and have established a bonded and dependent relationship with the child with the express or implied consent of a parent or person acting as a parent, or without that consent if no parent or person acting as a parent has been able or willing to perform parenting functions. The co-residence element is the one most often misread. Regular caregiving alone, however devoted, does not satisfy it: the statute asks whether the nonparent lived with the child.

The substantial-relationship route is K.S.A. 23-3308(c). It requires that the nonparent either has a familial relationship with the child by blood or law or formed the relationship without expectation of compensation; that a significant emotional bond exists between the nonparent and the child from the child's point of view; and that the nonparent both regularly exercised care of the child and established a bonded and dependent relationship under the same consent condition described above. A blood relationship standing alone is not enough.

K.S.A. 23-3306(g) confirms that "nonparent" includes a grandparent, sibling, or stepparent of a child, so this statute is broader than a grandparent-specific law.

The Standard: Three Required Elements

A petition under K.S.A. 23-3308 requires the court to find all three of the following: that denial of visitation would result in harm to the child; that the nonparent is or has been a consistent caretaker within one year of the initiation of the action, or has a substantial relationship with the child as defined above; and that visitation is in the child's best interest under K.S.A. 23-3315's factors. Requiring an explicit harm showing as an independent element, alongside the relationship threshold and the best-interest finding, makes this a genuine three-part evidentiary bar rather than a single best-interest test. K.S.A. 23-3306(e) defines harm to a child as a significant adverse effect on the child's physical, emotional, or psychological well-being.

Who Cannot Use This Act: The Scope Limits in K.S.A. 23-3307

K.S.A. 23-3307 carves several situations out of the act entirely, and one of them catches many of the families most likely to be reading this page.

Under K.S.A. 23-3307(b)(3), the act does not apply to a proceeding pertaining to a child who is the subject of an ongoing proceeding under article 22 of chapter 38, which is Kansas's Child-in-Need-of-Care code, or a substantially similar proceeding in another state. While a Child-in-Need-of-Care case is open, a nonparent visitation petition is simply not the available route. A grandparent's leverage in that window is the substantial-consideration preference under K.S.A. 38-2286, described below.

The timing matters, because K.S.A. 23-3307(a) says the act does reach proceedings in which the child has a guardian under article 30 of chapter 59 or a permanent custodian under article 22 of chapter 38. A child-welfare case that has concluded in a permanent custodianship is therefore treated differently from one still in progress.

The act also does not apply to a proceeding between nonparents unless a parent or person acting as a parent is a party to it, and it does not apply to visitation with an Indian child to the extent the federal Indian Child Welfare Act governs.

Two further bars are absolute. Under K.S.A. 23-3307(c), a nonparent may not maintain a proceeding under the act for visitation solely because the nonparent served as a foster parent of the child. Under K.S.A. 23-3307(d), an individual whose parental rights concerning a child have been terminated may not maintain a proceeding under the act concerning that child. Separately, K.S.A. 23-3307(e) makes relief unavailable during the period of a visitation order relating to a child of a deployed parent or person acting as a parent under K.S.A. 23-3217.

A Recent, Complete Rewrite

This framework was enacted by the Kansas legislature in 2024 and took effect July 1 of that year, replacing Kansas's prior, grandparent-specific statute entirely. A reader encountering older material describing Kansas grandparent-visitation law should treat it as outdated; the three-element harm-and-relationship test described above is the current law.

Custody: A Narrower, Case-Specific Preference

K.S.A. 38-2286 operates in a different context entirely: a Child-in-Need-of-Care removal proceeding, not a private civil action. When a child is removed from parental custody and is not placed with the other parent, a grandparent requesting custody must receive substantial consideration, with findings stated on the record weighing factors including the wishes of the parents, child, and grandparent, the extent of the grandparent's prior caregiving or support, the circumstances of the child's placement, including any domestic violence history, and the health of everyone involved. If custody is not awarded to the grandparent and the child enters state custody, a grandparent requesting placement again receives substantial consideration, and the state must provide written reasons for any denial. This section does not apply to Kansas adoption or relinquishment proceedings, and it is not available as a standalone lawsuit outside of an already-open Child-in-Need-of-Care case. It is also, per the scope limits above, the only route available while that case remains open, because K.S.A. 23-3307(b)(3) places the child outside the nonparent visitation act for its duration.

What Happens to Visitation After an Adoption

K.S.A. 59-2118 provides that, upon adoption, all rights of birth parents to the adopted person cease, except the rights of a birth parent who is the spouse of the adopting parent, a general parental-rights rule with a stepparent-marriage exception. No grandparent-specific visitation carve-out was found in that section's text, so its application to a separate grandparent visitation order is not addressed directly by the statute.

How to File: Procedure and Venue

Kansas District Courts, the state's single-tier general-jurisdiction trial courts, hear petitions under K.S.A. 23-3308. Child-in-Need-of-Care proceedings under K.S.A. 38-2286 proceed in the juvenile division of the same district court system, but only within an already-open case, not as an independent filing.

A K.S.A. 23-3308 petition is filed as its own action and does not require some other case to be pending first. That is not the same as saying it is always available: as explained above, K.S.A. 23-3307(b)(3) puts the act out of reach entirely while the child is the subject of an ongoing Child-in-Need-of-Care proceeding, so a grandparent whose grandchild is currently in a state removal case cannot use this route at all.

The petition itself is formal. K.S.A. 23-3311 requires the nonparent to verify it under penalty of perjury and to allege facts showing either the consistent-caretaker elements or a substantial relationship plus harm from denial of visitation. It must also allege specific facts about the duration and nature of the relationship, including the period the nonparent lived with the child and the care provided, any agreement between the parties about the child, previous attempts to obtain contact, the extent to which the parent is willing to permit contact, any compensation received for care of the child, jurisdictional facts under the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act, and the reason the requested visitation is in the child's best interest. Kansas does not publish a single statewide fee schedule for this filing; confirm the current cost with the district court clerk in the county where you plan to file.

Mediation and Informal Resolution First

Because Kansas now requires an explicit harm showing alongside the relationship and best-interest elements, and requires that showing by clear and convincing evidence against a presumption favoring the parent, a well-documented, well-prepared case matters more here than under a bare best-interest test. Mediation or a direct conversation with the parent is worth trying first, both to potentially resolve the situation informally and to help clarify what evidence a court would actually require.

The Litigation Reality in Kansas

A contested case under Kansas's new statute requires proving three separate elements, including actual harm to the child, by clear and convincing evidence, and because the framework is recent, there is not yet a developed body of Kansas appellate case law interpreting how courts will apply it in practice. That adds a layer of genuine uncertainty on top of the ordinary cost and time of litigation. Because the opposing party is typically the child's own parent, the process carries a real risk of lasting family damage regardless of outcome. If, after exploring mediation, a Kansas grandparent decides their situation meets the statute's elements and they want to pursue a petition, a family-law attorney licensed in Kansas can evaluate the specific facts and explain what the case would realistically involve.

Related Resources

For the separate custody track, see can grandparents get custody. For a national overview of grandparent visitation, see grandparent visitation rights and the grandparents' rights by state hub. For related Kansas family-law topics, see Kansas child custody laws and Kansas divorce laws.

Disclaimer

This article provides general information about Kansas grandparents' rights law. It is not legal advice and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Because Kansas's current statute took effect in 2024, there is not yet a developed body of case law interpreting it. Verify current details with the district court clerk or a licensed Kansas family-law attorney before acting on anything here.

---

Last updated: 2026-09-02.

Frequently Asked Questions

Did Kansas change its grandparent visitation law recently?

Yes. Kansas completely recodified its nonparent visitation law effective July 1, 2024, replacing the prior grandparent-specific statute with a broader framework covering grandparents, siblings, and stepparents under K.S.A. 23-3308.

Does a Kansas grandparent need a divorce or a parent's death to file for visitation?

No. Kansas's current statute does not use a life-event trigger. The test under K.S.A. 23-3308 is a relationship test instead, and it has two routes. The consistent-caretaker route requires that the nonparent, without expectation of compensation, lived with the child for not less than 12 months unless the court finds good cause to accept a shorter period, and also regularly exercised care, made day-to-day decisions about the child, and established a bonded and dependent relationship with parental consent. Regular caregiving without ever living with the child does not satisfy that route. The alternative is a substantial relationship under K.S.A. 23-3308(c), which requires a familial connection by blood or law or a relationship formed without expectation of compensation, plus a significant emotional bond from the child's point of view, plus regular care and a bonded, dependent relationship.

What must a Kansas grandparent prove to win visitation?

Three elements together: that denial of visitation would harm the child, that the grandparent is a consistent caretaker or has a substantial relationship with the child, and that visitation serves the child's best interest under Kansas's statutory factors. K.S.A. 23-3309 sets the burden: because a parent's decision is presumed to be in the child's best interest, the grandparent must prove those facts by clear and convincing evidence to rebut the presumption. Proof that the parent is unfit is not required.

Can a Kansas grandparent file for nonparent visitation while a Child-in-Need-of-Care case is open?

No. K.S.A. 23-3307(b)(3) states that the nonparent visitation act does not apply to a proceeding pertaining to a child who is the subject of an ongoing proceeding under article 22 of chapter 38, which is Kansas's Child-in-Need-of-Care code. While that case is open, the grandparent's path is the substantial-consideration preference for custody or placement under K.S.A. 38-2286, not a separate visitation petition.

Can a former foster parent or a parent whose rights were terminated use the Kansas nonparent visitation act?

No. K.S.A. 23-3307(c) bars a nonparent from maintaining a proceeding under the act solely because the nonparent served as a foster parent of the child, and K.S.A. 23-3307(d) bars an individual whose parental rights concerning a child have been terminated from maintaining a proceeding under the act concerning that child.

Can a Kansas grandparent get custody if the child is removed from a parent's home?

A grandparent seeking custody or placement in a Child-in-Need-of-Care removal proceeding must receive substantial consideration under K.S.A. 38-2286, though this is a preference within that specific proceeding, not an automatic right, and it does not apply outside a state removal case.

Does adoption end an existing Kansas grandparent visitation order?

Kansas's general adoption statute ends birth-parent rights upon adoption except for a birth parent who is the spouse of the adopting parent, but it does not directly address a separate grandparent visitation order, leaving that question unaddressed by the statute's text.