Category: relocate

How Do I Handle Out-Of-State Timesharing?

How Do I Handle Out-Of-State Timesharing?

Child custody and timesharing cases can be some of the most difficult, emotionally charged cases.  These cases are further complicated when one parent lives in a different state.  There are a number of things to keep in mind in dealing with a timesharing schedule across state lines.


This is good advice in any co-parenting situation, but is doubly important in multi-state situations.  If the parties are flexible and realistic in these situations, it makes life so much easier.  The parents have to realize that they will not be able to share the same sort of schedule as parents who live in close proximity.  Holidays will not be able to be divided in the same manner.  It may be necessary to consider alternating holidays or celebrating the holiday on an alternate day.  In my own family, we have adopted the tradition for years of celebrating major holidays on the Sunday before the actual holiday just to make sure it does not interfere with anyone else’s plans.  As our family has grown and expanded this has continued to work for our family.  After all, the important thing is the time together, not the date on the calendar.


Increased distance between the parents means increased expenses transporting the children.  Figure out the finances on the front end.  Will one person transport to visits and the other return the child?  Will you meet in the middle?  Dealing with the expense of traveling for visits gets even more important if air travel is necessary.  The airfare, hotels, gas money all add up over time.  The more detailed you can be in the planning, the more likely you will avoid contention in the future.


When in person visits are not possible, electronic communication becomes vitally important.  Fortunately, there are a numerous options available for parents and children separated by long distances.  Skype, Google Hangouts, FaceTime and other video chat options are available to actually allow you to see the child while you are talking.  Keep in mind that children have social lives as well, so you may need to include time for reasonable and regular communication in your parenting plan to ensure that the child is available.  Although it is not a perfect solution, it will help you maintain an active role in your child’s life.

Although multi-state parenting is a difficult situation, safeguards can be put in place to make it as workable as possible.

Photo courtesy of Kevin Dooley

Can I Prevent the Other Party From Relocating?

Can I Prevent the Other Party From Relocating?


In our increasingly mobile society, it is a sad reality that at some point in a coparenting relationship, one parent may decide to relocate to another state and take the child.  There are a myriad of legitimate reasons for a move.  Perhaps, new job opportunities await.  The other parent may have additional family available to help them.  The person may simply want a new start (maybe in a warmer climate).  Many people want to know if there is anything they can do to prevent the possibility of such a move.


Kentucky has implemented the Family Court Rules of Practice and Procedure.  Those rules specify that “[b]efore a joint custodian seeks to relocate, written notice shall be filed with the court and notice shall be served on the non-relocating joint custodian.”  Once that notice is filed, the other party can file a motion to modify custody or timesharing within twenty (20) days unless the parties agree.  Whether the court allows the relocation will be very fact dependent, but if a parent is seeking to relocate solely to frustrate the other parent’s time or relationship with the child, the court will likely not allow the child to move in a joint custody situation.  If, however, the relocating parent is a sole custodian, the chances of the court approving the relocation are greatly increased and the rules less stringent.


Another option to plan for a possible relocation is to have a backup plan; a “Plan B” timesharing schedule if you will.  In this situation if you know there is a chance that one parent may relocate in the near future, you can build that eventuality into the parenting plan.  In that way, if there is a relocation, no additional litigation expenses are incurred, the parties would simply begin following the “Plan B” schedule.  While it may not be a particularly pleasant thought to contemplate, it is better to address the possibility now rather than having to relitigate the case.


A final option is to include a firm “no relocation” clause in a final parenting agreement.  You may or may not be successful in negotiating such a provision and it will probably depend heavily on the parties involved.  Keep in mind it is unlikely that a court would ever order such a provision in a final judgment so this could only be included in a negotiated settlement.  If you include a “no relocation” clause, it will need to be very narrowly crafted.  courts are very hesitant to enforce these clauses for fear of violating a person’s right to relocate for legitimate, good faith reasons.  The courts are at all times primarily concerned with the best interests of the children and could very well override the “no relocation” clause.

If relocation is a possibility in your case, discuss the issue with your divorce/custody attorney as soon as possible to ensure your rights are properly addressed.

Photo courtesy of Karen Apricot

New Published Case on Relocation and Primary Residential Parent Designation

New Published Case on Relocation and Primary Residential Parent Designation

The Kentucky Court of Appeals published a new case dealing with a decision to modify a couple’s timesharing schedule to designate the father as the primary residential parent instead of letting the children relocate from Kentucky to Mississippi with the mother.

Based on the record before the Court of Appeals the parties had a very contentious and litigious relationship since at least 2002 involving domestic violence allegations and dependency, neglect and abuse cases.  The court had previously granted the mother permission to relocate to Mississippi in 2009, but the mother later returned to Kentucky before filing a notice of intent to relocate in 2013 with the Jefferson Family Court.   The father then filed a motion to modify the visitation schedule to allow the children to reside with him most of the time and sought to prohibit the mother from relocating the children.

The Court in this case again reiterated the difference between a motion to modify custody and a motion to modify timesharing.  Specifically, the Court pointed out that the a change in primary residential parent is a request to change the timesharing not a modification of custody.  This is an important point because to modify custody, the pleading that is filed must be accompanied by appropriate supporting affidavits in order for the trial court to even have jurisdiction to hear the issue.  That is not the case in a motion to modify the primary residential parent where the parties share joint legal custody.

The Court of Appeals reviewed the facts of the record and it appeared that, while the mother seemed to remain locked in her ways of animosity toward the father and his relationship with the children, the father had submitted to anger management and other therapy to improve his skills as a parent.  Additionally, the Court seemed disturbed that the mother seemed unable to see how her actions affected her children.  This is an excellent example of how being petty and litigious can often blow up in one’s face.  Normally, you are much better off if you can present yourself to the court as the calm, stable parent who is willing to foster a relationship between the children and the other parent.  Ultimately, the Court of Appeals found that the the trial court did not abuse its discretion by refusing to allow the children to relocate with the mother.

Photo courtesy of Brian Turner