HRO vs. OFP in Minnesota: What’s the Difference—and When Should Each Be Used?
In Minnesota, two of the most common legal tools used to address safety concerns are Harassment Restraining Orders (HROs) and Orders for Protection (OFPs). While they may sound similar, they serve different legal purposes and apply in different situations.
Understanding the difference is critical—especially in cases where family law issues like custody and parenting time are involved.
What Is an Order for Protection (OFP)?
An Order for Protection (OFP) is governed by Minnesota Statute § 518B.01, the Minnesota Domestic Abuse Act.
An OFP is available only when there is a qualifying relationship between the parties, such as:
Spouses or former spouses
Parents and children
Persons related by blood
People who live or have lived together
People who have a child together
Current or former romantic or sexual partners
To obtain an OFP, the petitioner must allege domestic abuse, which includes:
Physical harm or bodily injury
Assault
Terroristic threats
Criminal sexual conduct
Interference with an emergency call
An OFP can:
Order no contact
Remove a party from the home
Grant temporary custody or parenting time restrictions
Address safety concerns involving children
Because OFPs can directly affect custody and parenting time, courts take these cases very seriously.
What Is a Harassment Restraining Order (HRO)?
A Harassment Restraining Order (HRO) is governed by Minnesota Statute § 609.748.
An HRO does not require a family or household relationship. It can be used in situations involving:
Neighbors
Coworkers
Former friends
Acquaintances
Strangers
Harassment may include:
Repeated unwanted contact
Repeated phone calls, texts, or messages
Stalking
Threats
Conduct that substantially interferes with privacy or safety
An HRO is focused on stopping harassing behavior, not resolving family or parenting disputes.
Key Differences Between an OFP and an HRO
OFPHRORequires a qualifying family or household relationshipNo relationship requiredBased on domestic abuseBased on harassmentCan impact custody and parenting timeNot intended to resolve parenting issuesGoverned by Minn. Stat. § 518B.01Governed by Minn. Stat. § 609.748
Important Warning: Protective Orders Should NOT Be Used to Modify Parenting Time
Minnesota courts are increasingly clear on this point:
HROs and OFPs are not a substitute for family court.
Protective orders should never be used as a strategy to:
Gain leverage in a custody dispute
Cut off the other parent’s parenting time without evidence of abuse
Circumvent an existing court-ordered parenting schedule
Create a record for advantage in a divorce or custody case
If there is a genuine safety concern involving a child, the court can and should address that. But when a protective order is used improperly to interfere with parenting time, it can seriously backfire.
Courts may view misuse of an OFP or HRO as:
Bad faith litigation
An attempt at parental alienation
Evidence that the filing parent is unwilling to support the child’s relationship with the other parent
This can negatively affect custody determinations long-term.
What to Do If Parenting Time Needs to Change
If parenting time is no longer safe or workable, the correct legal path is to:
File a motion to modify custody or parenting time
Request temporary relief through family court
Present evidence specific to the child’s best interests
Family courts exist for exactly this reason—and using the proper process protects both parents and children.
Choosing the Right Legal Tool Matters
Both HROs and OFPs serve important roles in protecting people from harm. But they are powerful legal tools that must be used appropriately and honestly.
If you are unsure whether your situation qualifies for an OFP or an HRO—or if parenting time and safety concerns overlap—it is critical to speak with a Minnesota family law attorney before filing.
Using the right legal process from the beginning can prevent long-term consequences and ensure the court focuses on what matters most: safety, fairness, and the best interests of the child.
