High court upholds visit order

OLYMPIA — The state Supreme Court on Thursday upheld a contempt-of-court citation against a divorced mother who says she couldn’t compel her 13-year-old daughter to visit her father.

The case stems from the bitter 1997 divorce of Christopher and Sara Rideout of Olympia, in which custody of their two children was a hotly contested issue.

In 2000, Christopher Rideout went to court to protest that his ex-wife was not providing their daughter, then about 13, for visits according to the terms of the divorce.

Sara Rideout argued that the girl refused to visit her father for the entire period called for in the agreement. But a Thurston County Superior Court judge ruled the mother acted in bad faith and held her in contempt of court, and the Supreme Court agreed.

"A parent who is the primary residential custodian may be held in contempt … for failing to make reasonable efforts to require a child to visit the other parent as required by a parenting plan and court order establishing visitation," Chief Justice Gerry Alexander wrote in the unanimous opinion.

The ruling deferred to the lower court, which found that Sara Rideout was "overly involved" with her daughter in the case, including having the girl sign a statement that she didn’t want to spend time with her father.

Melissa Denton, Sara Rideout’s attorney, said her client made every attempt to persuade the daughter, including grounding and other punishments.

"The kid’s bigger than her, was bigger than her at the time," Denton said. "If she had hit her, would that have been enough? What level would be enough?"

Denton said she was disappointed the court hadn’t issued clearer guidelines for when children should be allowed more power to choose.

"When the other parent’s being a real jerk, they shouldn’t be forced to visit with them," Denton said.

Christopher Rideout’s attorney, Ken Masters, said the court’s "reasonable efforts" standards clearly leave room for a parent whose child cannot be persuaded to visit the other parent.

"That’s why the court narrowed its ruling very carefully," Masters said. "If the child resists and there’s evidence — then they’re not in bad faith."

Denton said the ruling will likely cost Sara Rideout more than $30,000 because she’ll be forced to pay her ex-husband’s legal fees in the case.

The Washington state National Organization for Women argued as a friend of the court, asking the justices to instruct lower courts to seek more facts in such cases by appointing independent advocates for the children.

Parents accused of contempt in such cases are overwhelmingly women, who often don’t have the money to fight in court, said Matt Cooper, an attorney for the state’s National Organization for Women chapter.

"It can force them to become bankrupt," Cooper said. "It can be used as a weapon. and it often is."

The court’s ruling didn’t address that issue.