[¶ 1] Kyle Mackey appeals from a district court order denying his motion to modify parenting time and petition for non-parental visitation. We conclude the district court did not err in finding that Kyle Mackey failed to establish а material change in circumstances justifying a modification of Kyle Mackey’s parenting time. We also conclude the district court did not err in finding that exceptional circumstances did not exist justifying non-parental visitation for Amber Mackey. We affirm.
I
[¶ 2] Kyle Mackey and Lindsey Brede-son have one minor child together, O.B., born in 2010. Kyle Mackey and Lindsey Bredeson were never married. Lindsey Bredeson has exercised residential care аnd primary decision-making responsibility since O.B.’s birth. Kyle Mackey is currently incarcerated in James River Correctional Center for Gross Sexual Imposition, a class AA felony, and was sentenced prior to O.B.’s birth to a term of fifteen years imprisonment with seven years suspended for five years.
[¶ 3] On January 23, 2013, the district court granted Lindsey Bredeson complete discretion regarding Kyle Mackey’s in-person parenting time at the secured facility with O.B. while he is incarcerated and as O.B. progresses. Specifically, the court found “the child has aged and become more aware of her surroundings and that visitations at James River Correctional Center have been upsetting to the child who is now Twenty-six (26) months.” The district court required Lindsey Bredeson allow Kyle Mackey telephonic or other electronic contact with O.B. while he is incarcerated. Kyle Mackey did not аppeal the district court’s initial order regarding parenting time. Kyle Mackey married Amber Mackey on April 12, 2013. On April 22, 2013, Kyle Mackey moved to modify parenting time claiming Lindsey Bredeson had denied him all visitation for the months оf January, February, March, April, and May. On May 17, 2013, Kyle Mackey petitioned for non-parental visitation requesting visitation for Amber Mack-ey alleging a psychological bond between Amber Mackey and O.B. Lindsey Brede-son married Kraig Gellner on May 18, 2013.
On
June 27, 2013, the district court denied Kyle Mackey’s motion to modify parenting time and petition for non-parental visitation. The district court found Kyle Mackey had not established a material change of circumstances occurred since the court’s prior visitation order issued a few months earlier. The district court also found exceptional circumstances did not
II
[¶ 4] Kyle Mackey argues the district court clearly erred in finding (1) he had failed to establish a material change of circumstances to grant his motion to modify parenting time; and (2) no exceptional circumstances existed to support granting his petition for non-parental visitation as Amber Mackey did not have a long standing relationship with O.B.
[¶ 5] A district court’s decision regarding parenting time,
Seibold v. Leverington,
A. Modification of Parenting Time
[¶ 6] After an initial award of primary residential responsibility is made, awards of parenting time are governed by N.D.C.C. § 14-05-22(2).
Simburger v. Simburger,
[¶ 7] Kyle Mackey argues the district court clearly erred in determining he had failed to establish a material change of circumstances has occurred since its prior visitation order. He asserts Lindsey Bre-deson’s withholding of his visitation with O.B., her attempts to alienate O.B.’s affection for him, and the marriages of both parties is a material change of circumstances and a modification of his parenting time is in the best interest of O.B.
[¶ 8] Kyle Mackey, Lindsey Bredeson, and Amber Mackey all submitted multiple affidavits to the district court. Kyle Mackey and Amber Mackey claimed Lindsey Bredeson frustrated Kyle Mackey’s visitation with O.B. Kyle Mackey claimed Lindsey Bredeson denied all visitation for the months of January, February, March, April, and May. He also claimed Lindsey Bredeson attempted to alienate O.B.’s affection for him by withholding his visitation with O.B. and allowing O.B. to call him by his name. Lindsey Bredeson claimed
[¶ 9] In regard to Kyle Mackey’s argument on frustration of visitation, the record shows that Lindsey Bredeson was exercising her discretion rather than frustrаting Kyle Mackey’s visitation or attempting to alienate O.B.’s affections for him. The marriages of Kyle Mackey to Amber Mackey and Lindsey Bredeson to Kraig Gellner constituted a change of circumstances but not оne that was material in regard to visitation. While the marriages of both Kyle Mackey and Lindsey Bredeson were not known at the January 23, 2013, hearing, no evidence was presented by Kyle Mackey regarding the impact оf the marriages on O.B. The district court’s finding that Kyle Mackey failed to establish a material change of circumstances and denial of his motion to modify parenting time is not induced by an erroneous view of the law and is supported by the record.
B. Petition for Non-Parental Parenting Time
[¶ 10] “It is well-settled that parents have a paramount and constitutional right to the custody and companionship of their children superior to that of any other person.”
Hamers v. Guttormson,
[¶ 11] Grandparents and great-grandparents may be granted visitаtion rights if the visitation is in the best interest of the child. N.D.C.C. § 14-09-05.1(1). Districts courts are to consider the amount of contact between the child and the grandparents or great-grandparents, as well as the child’s parents, when making a dеtermination regarding visitation. N.D.C.C. § 14-09-05.1(2). “The rationale for awarding custody to the grandparents is the existence of exceptional circumstances which will further the best interests of the child. It is appropriate to extend the application of that same rationale to the award to visitation to a non-parent.”
Quirk v. Swanson,
[¶ 12] Kyle Mackey petitioned the district сourt to grant Amber Mackey non-parental visitation. He argued his incarceration is an exceptional circumstance and Amber Mackey’s visitation is needed to ensure visitation between Kyle Mackey аnd O.B., which is in the best interest of O.B. Kyle Mackey also claimed that Amber Mackey had spent one day a month with O.B. over the previous fourteen months and, during that time, Amber Mackey and O.B. had developed a psychological bond. Lindsey Bredeson disputes that O.B. has formed a psychological bond with Amber Mackey. The short amount of time Amber Mackey has spent with O.B., standing alone, is not sufficient to show O.B. has formed such a close bond with her in ordеr to consider Amber Mackey a psychological parent.
See McAllister,
at ¶ 15. Under North Dakota case law, exceptional circumstances justifying non-parental visitation is based on the relationship between thе non-parent and the child, which creates a situation where visitation is in the best interest of the child.
See McAllister,
Ill
[¶ 13] The district court did not clearly err in finding Kyle Mackey failed to establish a material change in circumstances since the court’s initial award to justify a modification of Kyle Mackey’s parenting time and no exceptional circumstances existed to justify non-parental visitation for Amber Mackey. We have considered the remaining issues raised by the parties and find they are either unnecessary to our decision or are without merit. Therefore, we affirm the district court’s order.