Which statement best describes the standard for modifying custody in relocation cases?

• A. There must be a substantial change of circumstances affecting the child and the modification must be in the BIC.
• B. Relocation depends on the custodial parent's desire alone.
• C. Relocation is never allowed.
• D. Relocation requires agreement of both parents and child.

Answer: (A)

In relocation cases, the court treats moving with a child as a modification of the custody arrangement, and the test is whether the move serves the child’s best interests. A substantial change in circumstances since the existing order must be shown, and any modification must be in the child’s best interests. That means the court looks at whether the relocation would improve the child’s welfare—considering education, stability, safety, emotional needs, and the ability to maintain meaningful relationships with both parents—versus the potential disruption to the child’s relationship with the noncustodial parent. The move cannot be allowed merely because the custodial parent wants it; it must be justified by a genuine change in circumstances and in the child’s best interests. If relocation is approved, the court often structures a custody or visitation plan to preserve ongoing contact with the noncustodial parent.

Relocation isn’t simply permitted by the custodial parent’s desire, it isn’t categorically barred, and it doesn’t require both parents and the child to agree in every case. Instead, it hinges on the best interests analysis and substantial changes in circumstances.