You are a good father, and you are afraid the court will not see it. Maybe you have heard that Wyoming judges favor mothers. Maybe you have already started negotiating against yourself.
Wyoming law has no maternal presumption. Wyo. Stat. § 20-2-201(b) forbids preferring a parent “solely because of gender,” and the Wyoming Supreme Court has reversed judges who did. A father who arrives prepared is not fighting the statute. He is fighting assumptions, sometimes his own. Most fathers walk in braced to lose and accept every other weekend because they believe that is simply how it goes in Wyoming. That is not what the law says.
What Wyoming law actually says about gender
“In any proceeding in which the custody of a child is at issue the court shall not prefer one (1) parent as a custodian solely because of gender.” Wyo. Stat. § 20-2-201(b).
The Wyoming Supreme Court has enforced that repeatedly:
- Fanning v. Fanning, 717 P.2d 346 (Wyo. 1986): applying a maternal preference was “a mistake of law, and not a matter of discretion.” The case was reversed with instructions to award custody to the father.
- Basolo v. Basolo, 907 P.2d 348 (Wyo. 1995): “Invocation of the ‘tender years doctrine’ of maternal preference in custody awards is a mistake of law, requiring reversal.”
- Donnelly v. Donnelly, 2004 WY 72, and IC v. DW, 2015 WY 135, reaffirm the point.
An honest caveat, because you should hear it from your lawyer and not from opposing counsel: the statute forbids gender as the sole basis. The Court has said that considering gender is not entirely prohibited. Anyone promising you that gender is legally irrelevant in a Wyoming courtroom is selling you something. What is true is that there is no legal thumb on the scale. The outcome turns on the statutory factors, and on which parent shows up with a record.
The factors judges actually apply
Under § 20-2-201(a), the court “shall consider, but is not limited to”:
- The quality of the relationship each child has with each parent;
- Each parent’s ability to provide adequate care, including arranging care by others as needed;
- The relative competency and fitness of each parent;
- Each parent’s willingness to accept all parenting responsibilities, including taking and releasing care at the scheduled times;
- How the parents and each child can best maintain and strengthen a relationship with each other;
- How the parents and each child interact and communicate, and how that could improve;
- Each parent’s ability and willingness to let the other provide care without intrusion, and to respect the other parent’s rights, including privacy;
- The distance between the parents’ homes;
- Each parent’s current physical and mental ability to care for each child;
- Whether either parent must register as a sex offender;
- Any other factor the court finds relevant.
Look at the fourth, sixth, and seventh. Three of the factors are about whether you can co-parent with someone you may be furious at. Fathers lose custody cases on those factors more often than on income, housing, or work schedule, and they are the factors most within your control starting today. The court must also treat evidence of spousal or child abuse as contrary to the children’s best interests (§ 20-2-201(c)).
Shared custody after Bruegman
Section 20-2-201(d) says a court “shall not favor or disfavor any form of custody.” For years Wyoming case law treated shared custody as “not favored.” In Bruegman v. Bruegman, 2018 WY 49, the Court overruled that line: “there is no presumption that shared custody is contrary to the best interests of the children and shared custody should be considered on an equal footing with other forms of custody.” A Wyoming court can order shared custody over the other parent’s objection, and has.
The limit, stated plainly. Bruegman established neutrality, not preference. In Castellow v. Pettengill, 2021 WY 88, the Court reversed a shared-custody order because the trial court said “the law favors shared custody.” It does not. And bills that would have created a shared-parenting presumption (2025 SF0117 and 2026 SF0093) both failed. Wyoming does not lean toward 50/50.
What carries a shared-custody argument is evidence that it will work: living close to each other, compatible schedules, and a record of communicating about health, school, and discipline without litigation.
The right most non-custodial fathers never use
Section 20-2-201(e) gives a non-custodial parent the same access to a child’s school, medical, dental, and mental health records as the custodial parent. You do not need permission, and you do not need to go through the other parent. Schools and providers often do not know this and will push back; a short letter citing the statute usually settles it. Using that right also builds exactly the record the first three factors ask about.
If you were not married to the mother
Until paternity is legally established, an unmarried father generally has no enforceable custody or visitation rights, whatever the birth certificate says and whatever the arrangement has been. The Wyoming Parentage Act, §§ 14-2-401 through 14-2-907, is the route.
- Voluntary acknowledgment. When signed by both parents and filed, it is equivalent to a court judgment (§ 14-2-604).
- Rescission is short. A signer may rescind before the earlier of 60 days or the first hearing in any proceeding about the child, including a support hearing (§ 14-2-607).
- Later challenges are narrow: fraud, duress, or material mistake of fact, within two years (§ 14-2-608).
- Presumed fathers. Paternity is presumed for a man married to the mother at the birth or within 300 days after the marriage ends, and for a man who lived with the child for its first two years and openly held the child out as his own (§ 14-2-504).
- Genetic testing is available (§§ 14-2-701 and following), though a court may deny it where a parent-child relationship is already established.
Once paternity exists, custody is decided on the same best-interests factors as in a divorce. Waiting does not reduce what you may owe. It only reduces the relationship you are building. See In re Paternity of JWH, 2011 WY 66.
Changing an order you already have
Modification under § 20-2-204(c) is a two-step test, and the first step is a hard gate:
- A material change in circumstances since the order. Without it, the court never reaches best interests. Jacobson v. Kidd, 2018 WY 108; Arnott v. Arnott, 2012 WY 167.
- Then, whether modification serves the children’s best interests.
The change must affect the child’s welfare, but you do not have to prove the child has already been harmed.
Relocation. Arnott v. Arnott (2012) overruled the old rule that a custodial parent’s move was not by itself a material change. A move, and the difficulties distance adds, can reopen custody. Kelly v. Kelly, 529 P.3d 494 (Wyo. 2023), applied it in a father’s favor. But a move opens the door; it does not decide the case. In Ianelli v. Camino, 444 P.3d 61 (Wyo. 2019), the Court still reversed a transfer of custody to the father.
Interference with your time. The statute says it directly: “proof of repeated, unreasonable failure by the custodial parent to allow visitation to the other parent in violation of an order may be considered as evidence of a material change of circumstances.” As the Court put it in Bishop v. Bishop, 2017 WY 130, “when one parent undermines the other parent’s relationship with the child, it is contrary to the child’s welfare.” This is why you document every denied exchange and every unanswered call, in writing, when it happens.
Parental alienation: a realistic assessment
Alienation claims can work. In Womack v. Swan, 2018 WY 27, the Court affirmed moving primary custody to a father based in part on the mother’s alienating behavior, tied to the statutory factors.
They can also fail badly. In Ribera v. Ribera, 2026 WY 69, decided June 30, 2026, the Court noted it has never adopted a definition of parental alienation, and the father’s claim failed for lack of evidence. His own belief, and a guardian ad litem’s proposed findings, were not evidence. Alienation claims are not hopeless, but they are won on evidence, and a father who raises one without a documented record hands the other side an easy win.
Support when you share the children
Wyoming uses an income-shares model (§ 20-2-304). The shared-custody calculation in subsection (c) applies only when both conditions are met: each parent has the children overnight more than 25% of the year, and both contribute substantially to expenses beyond support. The combined obligation is then multiplied by 150%, divided by income, and offset. Anyone who tells you support drops automatically once you pass 25% of overnights is quoting half the statute.
Why this firm
Deep Waters Law stands between people and the institutions that have already decided something about them. For a father, that is often a courtroom that expects him to settle for every other weekend. Parent-child equity is a founding commitment of this firm, not a side practice.
Francis H. McVay is a trial and appellate lawyer. He has prosecuted cases, defended them, and argued before the Wyoming Supreme Court. Custody cases are won on the record, and every file here is built for the last judge who will read it.
Frequently asked questions
Do mothers automatically get custody in Wyoming?
No. The statute forbids preferring a parent solely because of gender, and the Wyoming Supreme Court has held that applying a maternal preference is a mistake of law requiring reversal.
Can a Wyoming court order 50/50 custody if the other parent objects?
Yes. Since Bruegman (2018), shared custody is considered on equal footing. But Wyoming does not favor it either; a trial court was reversed in Castellow (2021) for saying the law does.
I was never married to my child’s mother. What are my rights?
Until paternity is established, generally none that can be enforced. Establish paternity, then seek a custody order; the same factors apply as in a divorce.
Can I get my child’s school and medical records?
Yes. Section 20-2-201(e) gives you the same access as the custodial parent.
What do I have to show to change an existing order?
A material change in circumstances since the order, and that the change is in the children’s best interests. Without the first, the court does not reach the second.
The mother wants to move out of state. Can I stop it?
You can ask the court to revisit custody. Since Arnott (2012), a move can reopen the question, though it does not automatically decide it in your favor.
Talk to a lawyer today
The record you build in the next ninety days is the record a judge reads. Exercise your parenting time, document what happens, get the school and medical records, and communicate in writing. Call before your next exchange, not after the next missed one.
Call (307) 333-7539. Answered 24/7, including weekends. Or request a free consultation.
Related
The law is not settled until it is just.
This page describes Wyoming law in general terms as of September 2026 and is not legal advice. Every matter turns on its own facts. Contacting Deep Waters Law does not create an attorney-client relationship.