Rumer Willis and her ex, Derek Richard Thomas, are asking a judge for two very different outcomes in their ongoing custody dispute.

Willis wants changes to the current arrangement involving their 3-year-old daughter.

Thomas wants the existing framework to remain in place.

That disagreement is now at the center of a new round of court filings, with each parent offering sharply different accounts of what has happened since a June custody order established a structured plan for Thomas’ parenting time.

Thomas filed a declaration on Aug. 27 arguing that the court should preserve the arrangement already in place. He alleges that Willis has interfered with his scheduled access to their daughter and prevented the visitation plan from progressing as intended.

Willis, meanwhile, has raised concerns about Thomas’ behavior and alleged drug use, and has sought modifications to the custody structure.

Thomas denies those allegations.

A hearing has reportedly been scheduled for Sept. 10, meaning the judge may soon have to decide whether the June order should continue substantially as written or be changed.

The June Order Gave Willis Primary Physical Custody

The current dispute revolves around an order issued on June 9.

Under that arrangement, Willis was granted primary physical custody of the former couple’s daughter.

Thomas was given parenting time through a staged visitation plan.

According to his filing, the structure was designed to begin cautiously and then expand.

His time with his daughter would initially be monitored, with the possibility of eventually moving toward unmonitored visits and overnight parenting time if the process progressed successfully.

Thomas’ position is straightforward:

He says the plan has not been allowed to progress the way the court intended.

In his Aug. 27 declaration, he alleges that Willis has restricted or interfered with visits and prevented him from moving through the stages outlined in the order.

He is now asking the judge not to replace that framework with something more restrictive.

Willis Has Raised Her Own Concerns

Willis has presented a very different picture.

She has alleged that Thomas has behaved in ways she considers unsafe or erratic and has also raised allegations involving drug use.

Those allegations appear to be part of the reason she is asking the court to revisit the existing arrangement.

Thomas and his attorney deny the claims.

That distinction is important because the court has not yet made a final determination establishing either parent’s disputed allegations as fact.

The case therefore is not simply about whether Thomas wants more parenting time.

It is about whether the judge believes the existing structure remains appropriate in light of the concerns Willis has raised and the interference Thomas says he has experienced.

Each side is effectively asking the court to interpret the same recent history in a different way.

Willis argues that changes are needed.

Thomas argues that the plan should be allowed to work as originally ordered.

Thomas Says One July Visit Escalated to Police Being Called

One of the most concrete disputes described in Thomas’ filing involves a July parenting visit.

According to Thomas’ version of events, Willis arrived during the visit accompanied by Los Angeles police officers.

Thomas alleges that the encounter stemmed from a disagreement over his parenting time.

He says officers ultimately treated the matter as a civil custody dispute rather than a criminal issue.

That account comes from Thomas’ filing and represents his version of what happened.

The incident is significant because it illustrates how tense the disagreement over visitation had apparently become only weeks after the June order was entered.

Rather than remaining a disagreement handled solely through attorneys and scheduled exchanges, the conflict had reached the point where law enforcement was present during at least one contested interaction, according to Thomas.

For a judge reviewing the custody arrangement, incidents like that may matter because they can reveal not only what each parent is requesting, but how difficult the existing arrangement has been to implement in practice.

Thomas Says the Court Already Created a Path Forward

Thomas’ argument appears to rely heavily on the idea that the June order was deliberately structured to provide a gradual path toward expanded parenting time.

From his perspective, the court had already addressed concerns by making his visits progressive rather than immediately giving him unrestricted overnight access.

He contends that the staged system should therefore be allowed to continue.

If monitored visits went well, the arrangement could advance.

If problems emerged, the court could reassess.

Thomas alleges that Willis instead blocked or disrupted that progression before the process had a fair chance to unfold.

That is why he is asking the judge to leave the order in place rather than grant Willis’ request for changes.

His position essentially asks the court to enforce the existing plan.

Willis’ Position Raises a Different Question

Willis’ request presents the judge with a different issue.

If she believes circumstances have shown that the June arrangement is no longer safe or workable, the question becomes whether the court should modify the order before allowing Thomas additional parenting time.

Her concerns about alleged drug use and behavior are serious allegations.

Thomas disputes them.

That means the judge may need to weigh declarations, evidence, compliance with prior orders and potentially other testimony before deciding what arrangement best serves the child.

Custody disputes can become especially complicated when both parents interpret the same events differently.

One parent may describe an action as protection.

The other may describe the same action as interference.

That appears to be one of the central conflicts here.

Willis says changes are needed because of concerns she has raised.

Thomas says those concerns are being used to prevent him from receiving the parenting time the court already approved.

The Case Comes With an Unusually Famous Family Background

The dispute has also attracted attention because Willis is the daughter of Demi Moore and Bruce Willis.

Her parents remain two of Hollywood’s most recognizable stars, and Rumer grew up in a family that has spent decades in the public eye.

But the current case is not about Hollywood careers or celebrity relationships.

It concerns parenting time for Willis and Thomas’ young daughter.

Willis and Thomas were previously in a relationship but are no longer together.

As with many custody disputes, their disagreement now centers on how each parent will remain involved in their child’s life and what restrictions, if any, should apply.

The celebrity connection may explain why the filings have received attention.

The legal question is much narrower.

The Judge Is Being Asked to Choose Between Opposite Requests

That is what makes the next hearing important.

The current framework was created only a few months ago.

Thomas wants it preserved.

Willis wants it changed.

Thomas alleges that he has been prevented from receiving parenting time the order was supposed to provide.

Willis has raised allegations that she says justify additional restrictions or modifications.

Thomas denies those claims.

Neither side’s disputed version should be treated as established fact until the court evaluates the evidence.

But the disagreement itself is clear.

One parent is asking the judge to reconsider the June arrangement.

The other is asking the judge to make sure it stays in place.

And after weeks of allegations, contested visits and competing court papers, the Sept. 10 hearing may determine which version of the custody plan moves forward.