What “Parental Rights” Leaves Out
A new 50-state ranking says it measures parental rights. Its parental-rights score measures two things, and neither one is custody.
By Michael Phillips | Family & State
On Oct. 1, Defending Education released its first RISE report, short for Rankings on Integrity in State Education. Tennessee finished first and Alabama second. Florida and North Carolina tied for third. Illinois was 50th and the District of Columbia 51st. Maryland tied for 45th.
Coverage framed the results as state rankings on parental rights. But the report’s “parental rights” category is built from two measures. The first scores whether state law and local school-district policies require schools to tell parents when a student uses a different gender identity at school. The second scores sex education: whether parents must consent to it or can opt out, and whether state law prohibits, omits, or requires sexual orientation and gender identity content. The category is worth 20 points.
It does not measure what happens when parents separate, and a court decides how much of a child’s life each parent gets to be part of.
What the ranking actually counts
There is a fair argument that school transparency matters. Many parents want to know what their children are taught and what is recorded about them at school. The group’s own spokesperson told reporters the ranking looks at laws and policies, not outcomes, and that it makes no claim about test scores.
But the label “parental rights” is doing more work than the data underneath it. Four states tie for first in the category at 85 percent: North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee and West Virginia. Ten states and the District of Columbia tie at 13 percent: California, Colorado, Illinois, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington. Those scores say something about school disclosure and sex-education rules. They say nothing about whether a parent in any of those states has a fair shot at keeping a relationship with a child after separation.
“But the label ‘parental rights’ is doing more work than the data underneath it.”
Run the custody test
There is a scorecard for that question. The National Parents Organization grades every state’s custody statutes on whether they permit, encourage, prefer, or presume shared parenting. It is an advocacy group with a stated mission of making equal shared parenting the norm, so its grades carry that perspective. It also grades statutes, not courtroom practice. Even so, it is the closest thing to a national custody-law scorecard, and the two rankings do not agree.
| State | RISE parental-rights rank | NPO custody-statute grade (2025) |
|---|---|---|
| West Virginia | 1 (tie) | A+ |
| Tennessee | 1 (tie) | B- |
| North Carolina | 1 (tie) | D- |
| South Carolina | 1 (tie) | D- |
| Florida | 14 (tie) | A |
| Arizona | 21 (tie) | A+ |
| Missouri | 24 (tie) | A |
| Maryland | 41 (tie) | D- (predates HB 1191) |
| District of Columbia | 41 (tie) | B+ |
Of the four states tied for first on “parental rights,” only West Virginia earns an A on custody law; it created a presumption of equal custodial allocation in 2022. North Carolina and South Carolina both land at a D-, though NPO’s description of both is incomplete. North Carolina states in G.S. 50-13.01 that it is state policy to encourage both parents to share equitably in raising a child, even though § 50-13.2 sets no presumption of joint or equal custody. South Carolina requires a court in a contested case to consider all custody options, including joint custody, and to state its reasoning (§ 63-15-230). Neither state presumes shared time. South Carolina lawmakers have considered changing that: the Equal Parenting Act (H. 4622 and S. 901) would create a rebuttable presumption of equal or approximately equal parenting time, but the Legislature’s record shows H. 4622 went no further than the House Judiciary Committee as of late April 2026.
“A parent could be forgiven for asking which of these lists is actually about parents.”
Now look at the other end. Florida (effective July 1, 2023) and Missouri (effective Aug. 28, 2023) each enacted a rebuttable presumption of equal or approximately equal parenting time. Both earn an A from NPO, but neither cracks the top ten of RISE’s parental-rights category. The District of Columbia is dead last overall in the RISE ranking, yet D.C. Code § 16-914 sets a rebuttable presumption that joint custody is in a child’s best interest, and NPO grades it a B+. That presumption flips when a court finds an intrafamily offense, child abuse, or neglect.
A parent could be forgiven for asking which of these lists is actually about parents.
The ground is moving
Mississippi shows how quickly a grade can go stale. RISE ranks it tied for eighth on parental rights and tied for tenth overall, and NPO’s 2025 report gave its custody statute a D-. Mississippi enacted House Bill 1662, approved by the governor on April 8, 2026, and effective July 1, 2026. It amends § 93-5-24 to create a presumption, rebuttable by a preponderance of the evidence, that joint custody and equally shared parenting time is in the child’s best interest, and it requires a court that departs from the presumption to document its reasons. By its terms, the presumption applies only to initial temporary and initial final custody orders entered after July 1, 2026, not to modifications, and the statute’s separate presumption against custody for a parent with a history of family violence stays in place. NPO’s grade predates that law.
“Mississippi shows how quickly a grade can go stale.”
Louisiana moved as well. Act 605 of 2026 (House Bill 1239), effective Aug. 1, 2026, amended R.S. 9:335 so that physical custody “shall” be shared equally unless a court finds that is not feasible or not in the child’s best interest; the old text said it “should” be shared equally to the extent feasible and in the child’s best interest. RISE ties Louisiana for seventh overall and 12th on parental rights, and NPO’s 2025 report graded its statute a B-.
The movement is not all in one direction. New Jersey, which RISE puts at 13 percent on parental rights, enacted S4510/A5761 in January 2026. The legislature’s final reprint rewrote the statute’s policy declaration, which had made “frequent and continuing contact with both parents” a paramount concern, so that children’s protection and welfare are paramount and continuing contact with both parents is something that policy can include. It declares that custody decisions must promote a child’s safety as a threshold issue, says a court may not presume that a child’s reluctance to see a parent was caused by the other parent, and bars courts from ordering therapy unless there is generally accepted and scientifically valid proof of its safety, effectiveness and therapeutic value. NPO’s 2025 grade for New Jersey was a D+.
Maryland scores low on both, with a catch
Maryland, like New Jersey, scores low on both lists. RISE gives it 13 percent on parental rights and a tie for 45th overall. NPO’s 2025 report card gave its custody statute a D-, citing no presumption or preference for shared parenting, no policy statement encouraging it, no friendly-parent factor, and no specific statute on false allegations of abuse in a family case.
That grade predates a real change. Maryland Family Law § 9-201, which took effect Oct. 1, 2025 under House Bill 1191, wrote a 16-factor best-interest framework into statute for the first time, codifying and organizing considerations that had developed largely through appellate case law. The list includes frequent, regular, and continuing contact with parents who can act in the child’s best interest, and whether and how parents who live apart will share the rights and responsibilities of raising the child. Courts may consider the factors, but § 9-201(b) requires them to state findings of fact, on the record or in a written opinion, including their consideration of each factor listed. The law does not create a presumption of shared parenting. Section 5-203 still says only that a court may award custody to either parent or joint custody to both, and that neither parent is presumed to have a superior right. No updated NPO grade was available at the time of writing, so how Maryland would score today is an open question.
That leaves Maryland parents in an odd spot. The school-disclosure debate is real, and so is the new custody statute, but neither scorecard captures what a parent in a custody dispute will actually face.
“Neither scorecard captures what a parent in a custody dispute will actually face.”
What a real parental-rights ranking would count
Building one would mean measuring things nobody has agreed to measure. Based on the gaps in the existing scorecards, a serious list would include at least these:
- The default rule. What does the statute say about parenting time when parents cannot agree, and must a judge put written findings on the record when departing from it?
- Decision-making and information access. Does each parent keep access to school, medical, and counseling records, and what happens when parents who share legal custody disagree on education or health care? North Carolina’s § 50-13.2 gives each parent equal access to a child’s health, education, and welfare records absent a contrary court order, and South Carolina’s § 63-15-260 does the same for educational and medical records.
- Temporary orders. NPO notes that early orders create a de facto status quo, and its state-by-state review finds that most statutes do not address shared parenting at that stage.
- Enforcement. NPO leaves this out of its grades but argues that contempt actions are costly, slow, and rarely a deterrent. It points to Missouri’s Family Access Motions, which Missouri law (§ 452.400) says must be decided within 60 days of service, absent a waiver or a best-interest finding, and which can bring make-up parenting time.
- Consequences for knowingly false allegations. NPO lists Florida, Hawaii, Maine, Minnesota, North Dakota, and South Dakota as treating this as a negative factor in custody decisions. Texas enacted a 2023 law (SB 718) that is a remedy rather than a penalty: courts must, absent good cause, order make-up time when a parent lost court-ordered time to a child-welfare investigation that ended without a finding of abuse or neglect. NPO’s list is not exhaustive: Mississippi’s § 93-5-24 requires a party whose domestic-violence allegations are found completely unfounded to pay the other side’s court costs and reasonable attorney’s fees.
- Interference and parent-child estrangement. South Dakota names intentional alienation or interference with the other parent’s relationship as a factor courts weigh. New Jersey’s 2026 law pulls the other way: its final text says a court may not presume that a child’s reluctance to see a parent was caused by the other parent.
- Data. NPO says custody outcomes are not properly reported in most states, and that the federal government does not track shared parenting at all. No one can rank states on how courts behave when no one counts.
“No one can rank states on how courts behave when no one counts.”
That last item is the one that should trouble everyone, regardless of how they feel about the rest. A ranking of outcomes cannot exist because the outcomes are not recorded.
The other side of it
None of that means an equal-parenting presumption is automatically the right answer. A 2013 report from the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts, drawing on 32 family-law experts and cited in the NPO report, warned against imposing a single template for dividing time on every family. NPO itself says the frequency of false abuse allegations is hotly debated, and that courts must be able to identify genuine abuse. The presumptions it favors are rebuttable and typically carry exceptions for domestic violence. And NPO concedes that statutes and courtroom practice can diverge in both directions: it cites evidence that Wisconsin courts order more shared parenting without new legislation, and notes that some states with strong statutes see them diluted by judicial discretion.
A good grade on paper, in other words, does not guarantee a good result in a courtroom. But the same logic cuts the other way for RISE. A top ranking on school disclosure does not mean a parent will be treated fairly when a court decides where their child lives.
“A good grade on paper does not guarantee a good result in a courtroom.”
The questions worth asking
“Until someone does, ‘parental rights’ will keep meaning whatever the person drawing the map decides it means.”
Parents are told their rights depend on which state they live in. That is true, but not in the way these rankings suggest. Before the next election, a better set of questions for any candidate or legislator might be: Does our custody statute state a default for parenting time? Does it require a judge to explain a departure? Is there a fast, affordable remedy when a court-ordered schedule is violated? And does the state keep track of what its family courts actually order?
Until someone does, “parental rights” will keep meaning whatever the person drawing the map decides it means.
Sources and notes
This piece draws on Defending Education’s RISE Rankings report (September 2026), including its state tables and scoring criteria, and its Oct. 1 release page; on coverage of the release by KOMO/The National News Desk (Oct. 2) and The Center Square (Oct. 4); and on the National Parents Organization’s 2025 Shared Parenting Report Card, an advocacy group’s review of state statutes only, not court decisions, which leaves parenting-time enforcement out of its grades. KOMO reported that 11 states and Washington, D.C., scored 13 percent in the parental-rights category; the report’s table shows ten states plus D.C. at that score, and this article uses the table. Where NPO’s report conflicts with statutory text, this article follows the statute: Texas SB 718 was enacted in 2023, not 2024; North Carolina does state a policy of encouraging both parents to share in raising a child, in G.S. 50-13.01, enacted in 2015; and South Carolina’s friendly-parent factor is in § 63-15-240(B)(6), not § 63-15-40. State law was checked against West Virginia Code § 48-9-102a; Florida CS/HB 1301 (2023); Missouri SB 35 (2023) and § 452.400; D.C. Code § 16-914; Maryland Family Law § 5-203 and Chapter 483 of 2025 (HB 1191, approved May 13, 2025); North Carolina G.S. 50-13.01 and 50-13.2; South Carolina Code Title 63, Chapter 15 (the Legislature’s current online code) and bill H. 4622 (2025-26 session); Louisiana Act 605 of 2026; Mississippi HB 1662 of 2026 (as sent to the governor; approved April 8, 2026); and New Jersey S4510 (the Legislature’s fourth reprint; enacted as P.L. 2025, c. 316 on January 20, 2026, according to the New Jersey Legislative Digest for Jan. 28, 2026). NPO’s grades predate the 2026 changes discussed here. A broader search, including NPO’s own site, found Mississippi and Louisiana as the 2026 enactments of equal-parenting provisions; Oklahoma SB 1708 cleared Senate Judiciary in February 2026 but died in the Senate; and other 2026 proposals the search turned up had failed or were pending as of spring. Other changes to state law may exist.
Keep Family & State Free
Family & State exists to support parents navigating separation, custody, and systems that are often confusing, isolating, or overwhelming. This work is grounded in lived experience, careful research, and respect for the real stakes families face.
If this article helped you feel less alone, better informed, or more grounded, reader support helps keep these resources free and available to others who need them.
Need help reviewing or organizing court or formal documents?
Family & State offers non-legal document review and organization for people representing themselves. This includes clarity, structure, neutral tone, and timeline organization — not legal advice or representation.
Have a story, experience, or resource to share?
Submissions are reviewed with care and discretion. We respect privacy and handle sensitive information responsibly.
Discover more from Family & State
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
