Relocation in Washington State

As society progresses, people are becoming more mobile and frequently move for many reasons. For example, people move for new job opportunities, school, or just to be closer to family. However, if a custodial parent has a parenting plan or court order in place and is attempting to relocate with their child, things can get complicated quickly. To prevent unfairness to the non-custodial parent, Washington State has specific laws that prohibit custodial parents from simply packing up and moving when their is a child custody order or parenting plan in place.

Generally, Washington law requires that a custodial parent give sixty days notice of the proposed relocation to anyone legally entitled to visitation or residential time with the child. Most frequently, this is the non-custodial parent. The notice must include detailed information such as the proposed new address and the reasons for the relocation.

Equally important, once the custodial parent provides a sixty day notice, the non-custodial parent must file an objection to the proposed relocation within thirty days if he or she disagrees with the relocation. However, if the proposed relocation is within the child’s current school district, the non-custodial parent has no right to object. During this thirty day objection period, the parent attempting to relocate cannot change the residence of the child without a court order or unless the court finds that special circumstances exist. If the non-custodial parent fails to object during these thirty days, Washington courts will usually allow the relocation.

If the non-custodial parent timely objects, they still face additional hurdles. The reason for this is because in 2003, a Washington Court concluded that there is a presumption that a custodial parent seeking to relocate with the child should be free to do so. In re Osborne.Therefore, to prevent the move, the non-custodial parent must rebut this presumption. In order to do this, the non-custodial parent must prove that the detrimental effect of the move outweighs any potential benefit to the child and the custodial parent attempting to relocate.

When Washington courts consider the objection, they weigh several factors. For example, under RCW 26.09.520, Washington courts are required to consider: (1) the relative strength, nature, quality, extent of involvement and stability of the child’s relationship with each parent, siblings, and other persons in the child’s life; (2) the parent’s prior agreements; (3) whether it would be worse to disrupt the child’s contact with the custodial parent or the non-custodial parent; (4) whether either parent has limited visitation because of prior violence, abandonment, or abuse; (5) why the parents are requesting or opposing relocation, and whether these requests are being made in good faith; (6) the child’s developmental needs and how the relocation will affect their physical, educational, or emotional development; (7) whether the move will allow for a better quality of life, resources, and opportunities for the child and the relocating parent; (8) whether arrangements can be made in order to continue the child’s relationship with the non-custodial parent; (9) whether there are alternatives to relocating, or whether the non-custodial parent can feasibly and reasonably relocate as well; and (10) the financial impact and logistics of the move or its prevention. If the judge allows the relocation, both parents can propose a revised parenting plan that considers the relocation and the new distance between the non-custodial and custodial parents’ homes.

Because the objecting parent faces such an uphill battle, it is very beneficial for them to speak with an experienced child custody attorney. In my opinion, it is unfair to penalize non-custodial parents in this way. Non-custodial parents already spend less time with their children compared to custodial parents, and relocating can very likely disrupt the non-custodial parents access to the child even further. Therefore, until the Washington legislature reconsiders this presumption, it is important for an objecting parent to seek advice from an attorney, object in a timely manner, and demonstrate why the detrimental effect of the move outweighs any potential benefit to the child and the custodial parent.