The term "unfit parent" is thrown around a lot in child custody cases, but when it is invoked in grandparent visitation cases, its meaning is a little different.
Clearly, if grandchildren are in the custody of unfit parents, grandparents will want to do something about it, such as reporting the situation to authorities or even attempting to get the child put in the custody of the grandparent.
In the context of a grandparent visitation case, the meaning is that the parent is unfit to make a decision about visitation and has made a decision that harms the child.
It does not necessarily mean that the parent is abusive or neglectful in other ways.
The concept that a parent's fitness must be impugned can be traced to the U.S. Supreme Court case of Troxel v. Granville, which found that "fit parents" are presumed to make decisions that are best for their children, even if that decision is to cut off the grandparents.
Thus the grandparent who is seeking visitation must prove that visitation is in the best interests of the child. Some states go farther and require that the grandparent prove that the child will suffer harm if visitation is denied. This is what is commonly called the harm standard.
If it can be shown that not seeing a grandparent will cause harm to a child, then it can be reasonably assumed that the parent was not "fit" to make that particular decision.
Occasionally a court will rule in favor of the grandparents out of concern that a child could be facing actual physical harm. This was the case in the Massachusetts case of Sher v. Desmond, but that is hardly a typical case.
Some States That Require Parental Unfitness
Although any ruling that overrides a parent's decision implies a finding of parental unfitness to some degree, some states go farther. Below is a sampling of states in which parental unfitness is specified as a requirement for visitation to be awarded. Click on the links for more information. If your state is not listed, check out grandparents' visitation rights by state.
Alabama: In a controversial decision, the Alabama Supreme Court ruled "a prior and independent finding of parental unfitness" is required before the state can intervene in family matters. The Alabama statutes about grandparent visitation remain on the books but are useless for most grandparents.
Connecticut: The statutes do not require a finding of parental unfitness, but in the case of Roth v. Weston, the Connecticut Supreme Court found that a child would have to be "neglected, uncared-for or dependent" to justify awarding grandparent visitation over a parent's objection.
South Carolina: In the case of Camburn v. Smith, the South Carolina Supreme Court ruled that visitation cannot be awarded over the objections of fit parents. Parents must be shown to be unfit by "clear and convincing evidence." Subsequently the South Carolina statutes were revised, but the resulting statutes still set a difficult path for grandparents to win visitation.
States that are not listed may not be permissive states. They may simply arrive at their restrictive status by using different language.
Source...