what forms do I need to file to move out of state with my child
- Thread Starter kwanetria
- Start date
- Status
shrinkmaster
Well-Known Member
Joint custody was ruled on by a court?
army judge
Super Moderator
You need to discuss this situation with a family law attorney.
If you want to relocate from California to Iowa, for example, it'll take much more than completing a form.
You and daddy have joint custody, so the legal issues were previously settled.
The only way you can relocate out of California is to petition the court to be heard on the matter.
But, that's likely just to be a waste of your time and money, because daddy says no way.
Unless you (or your lawyer) can convince the court otherwise, you won't be allowed to move.
If, on the other hand, you and dad discuss the matter; you explain to him why you want to relocate, you agree to pay the travel costs to transport him or the child (or both) between your new state and California several times a year - then he might change his mind.
But, I urge you to speak with a local lawyer or forget the entire idea as long as dad disagrees it won't happen.
Proserpina
Moderator
OP - what's the current timeshare?
AJ - not accurate for California. Timeshare issues notwithstanding, it's up to the non-relocating parent to convince the court that relocating the child would be harmful.
AJ - not accurate for California. Timeshare issues notwithstanding, it's up to the non-relocating parent to convince the court that relocating the child would be harmful.
army judge
Super Moderator
The OP indicated that dad is against it.
I can't know what will happen, but one might suspect that dad will protest it before the court.
As with most things, opinions vary:
http://www.divorcenet.com/states/california/ca_art09
California law does not expressly prevent either parent from moving out of state, but specifics of their custody agreement may prevent them from taking the child with them.
In general, California law gives the custodial parent the assumed right to relocate with her children, as long as her "move-away petition" is granted, and unless the other parent can present convincing evidence that the move would be detrimental to the child.
Read more: http://www.ehow.com/info_7893573_california-laws-parent-relocation.html#ixzz2pgL38QiG
It would appear that the process requires something more substantial than "completing a form".
Hence, my suggestion that OP speak with a local family attorney for guidance SPECIFIC to her situation.
At any rate, if OP is to be believed (and I have no reason to doubt her when she says dad isn't hot on this idea), court activity seems imminent.
Proserpina
Moderator
Yes, it will go before the court. I don't think anyone said anything different.
So, Mom wants to relocate. I dunno..let's say Hawaii because it's currently one of a teeny handful of less-than-freezing US states at the moment.
Mom files with the court.
Dad is served.
Now we have a hearing on the matter (for the sake of argument, we'll assume that Mom has included a revised parenting plan suggestion that gives Dad most holidays and agrees to pay the plane fare back and forth).
Dad still doesn't want the move to happen.
Since in CA the presumption is in favor of relocation, Dad has to convince the court why the move should not be allowed.
Example A:
Mom & Dad have "joint custody", with Dad having every other weekend and one night per week with the child.
Dad's reasons for objecting: Child goes to school in CA, and child has friends and relatives living close by. Unfortunately Dad works long hours in the ER, so child-care would be something of an issue.
Mom's reasons: She likes the weather and her Aunt Hedwig lives there.
In this scenario, Dad will likely end up seeing the child next time school is out.
Example 2.
Mom & Dad have a literal joint arrangement with one week on/off.
In this example, Dad's case has virtually been made for him; there are few courts (even in CA) willing to change a true 50/50 timeshare if the reason is to relocate. There are a couple of notable exceptions, but they're unusual enough to make them moot in this discussion.
Example 3
Dad = similar circumstances to #1.
Mom = identical circumstances to #1.
The one hiccup is that Dad is terminally ill. So while ordinarily Mom would be good to go, the court is far more likely to deny permission based purely on Dad's shortened life spam.
So there we have 3 examples, with 3 likely outcomes.
The only reason I wrote this post, AJ, is because you initially stated that if Dad doesn't agree Mom ain't going anywhere (or rather, the child ain't going anywhere). The point being, outside of unusual circumstances Mom is going to "win" every time unless Dad has some wicked good tricks up his sleeve.
So, Mom wants to relocate. I dunno..let's say Hawaii because it's currently one of a teeny handful of less-than-freezing US states at the moment.
Mom files with the court.
Dad is served.
Now we have a hearing on the matter (for the sake of argument, we'll assume that Mom has included a revised parenting plan suggestion that gives Dad most holidays and agrees to pay the plane fare back and forth).
Dad still doesn't want the move to happen.
Since in CA the presumption is in favor of relocation, Dad has to convince the court why the move should not be allowed.
Example A:
Mom & Dad have "joint custody", with Dad having every other weekend and one night per week with the child.
Dad's reasons for objecting: Child goes to school in CA, and child has friends and relatives living close by. Unfortunately Dad works long hours in the ER, so child-care would be something of an issue.
Mom's reasons: She likes the weather and her Aunt Hedwig lives there.
In this scenario, Dad will likely end up seeing the child next time school is out.
Example 2.
Mom & Dad have a literal joint arrangement with one week on/off.
In this example, Dad's case has virtually been made for him; there are few courts (even in CA) willing to change a true 50/50 timeshare if the reason is to relocate. There are a couple of notable exceptions, but they're unusual enough to make them moot in this discussion.
Example 3
Dad = similar circumstances to #1.
Mom = identical circumstances to #1.
The one hiccup is that Dad is terminally ill. So while ordinarily Mom would be good to go, the court is far more likely to deny permission based purely on Dad's shortened life spam.
So there we have 3 examples, with 3 likely outcomes.
The only reason I wrote this post, AJ, is because you initially stated that if Dad doesn't agree Mom ain't going anywhere (or rather, the child ain't going anywhere). The point being, outside of unusual circumstances Mom is going to "win" every time unless Dad has some wicked good tricks up his sleeve.
OP, I do want to point out you are free to move, however, the courts have to decide what will happen to your child. I would strongly suggest you get a lawyer. If you move with the child without proper legal permission and Dad fights it, you may lose custody.
If Dad is an involved parent, your child will probably be ordered to stay. You, can move. Dad will get custody.
If Dad rarely sees child more than standard, then you will be green lighted to move. Good luck.
If Dad is an involved parent, your child will probably be ordered to stay. You, can move. Dad will get custody.
If Dad rarely sees child more than standard, then you will be green lighted to move. Good luck.
- Status
Ask a Question
Share this page
