Timothy F. Rayne, Esquire

Whether due to a new job, remarriage, a desire for a change of scenery or other reasons, the issue of one parent wanting to relocate out of the jurisdiction with the children often arises in child custody cases. Obviously, a long-distance move with the custodial parent can have a serious effect on the relationship with the non-custodial parent. The Pennsylvania courts have developed procedures and standards to determine whether a move with the children will be permitted.   

The Procedures
When the issue of relocation arises, it can be resolved one of two ways – either by agreement or through litigation. If the parents can reach a mutual agreement, the minor children can move with the relocating parent without formal court proceedings. In such a case, the relocating parent should obtain the written consent of the other parent before moving.

However, if no mutual decision can be reached, the parents must litigate the issue and have the court decide whether a move will be permitted. In such cases, either party can file a petition regarding the issue and a formal court hearing will be scheduled. At the hearing, the parents, possibly the children and other witnesses will testify regarding the relocation issue.

Relocation Considerations
As with all custody issues, the bottom line question in relocation cases is: What is in the best interests of the children? The Pennsylvania Appellate courts have stated that the trial judge must consider the following interests:

• The custodial parent's desire to have control over deciding what is best for both him or her and the children;
• The interest of the children in maintaining a meaningful relationship with the non-custodial parent;
• The interest of the non-custodial parent in sharing in the love and rearing of the children; and
• The state's interest in protecting the best interests of the children.

When faced with the decision whether to permit a custodial parent to relocate at a geographical distance from the non-custodial parent, the trial judge must consider the following factors:

• The potential advantages of the proposed move, economic or otherwise, and the likelihood that it would substantially improve the quality of life for the moving parent and children and is not the result of a momentary whim;
• Whether the motives are genuine of both the parent seeking to move and the parent seeking to prevent the move; and
• The availability of realistic, substitute visitation arrangements that will adequately foster an ongoing relationship between the children and the non-custodial parent.

During the hearing, the moving parent has the burden to show that the move will substantially benefit him or her, as well as the children, and that there are genuine motives behind the move. The moving parent should also try to present evidence establishing that there will be alternative visitation arrangements. In addition to showing that his or her motives are pure, the parent opposing the move should try to discredit the moving parent's assertion of substantial benefit and show that visitation will not be sufficient to foster an ongoing relationship with the children.

MacElree Harvey
17 West Miner Street
Post Office Box 660
West Chester, PA 19381–0660
p | 610.436.0100
f | 610.430.7885
f | 610.429.4486
e | info@macelree.com