Can I Move Away with My Kids in Order to Restrict My Ex’s Parenting Time?

Major family decisions are hard, and relocation during or after a separation can be especially challenging. When one parent seeks to move with their children, the court must evaluate several key factors to determine whether the move is not only practical but also in the best interests of the child. The following case study examines how the courts approach relocation in the context of parental separation, with a focus on the child’s well-being.

Case Study: In re Marriage of Norris

In In re Marriage of Norris, the mother argued that the court unjustly allowed her children to relocate with their father. Following the divorce decree, an agreed order was entered that modified her parenting time and allocated sole decision-making and custody to the father. The mother was granted supervised parenting time.

Subsequently, the mother filed a motion to modify the agreed order, while the father filed a petition seeking permission to relocate with the children.

The trial court considered all relevant relocation factors under Section 609.2 of the Illinois Marriage and Dissolution of Marriage Act (IMDMA). After weighing the 11 statutory factors, the court granted the father’s petition and approved the relocation.

The mother appealed, arguing that the court improperly treated the case as an emergency and misapplied the Section 609.2 factors. The appellate court rejected her argument, noting that the father had not filed his petition as an emergency. Instead, the trial court independently found that an emergency existed due to the time constraints related to the relocation.

The mother also claimed that the relocation imposed restrictions on her parenting time without the required hearing or evidentiary proof under Section 603.10 of the IMDMA. However, the appellate court found that the relocation actually facilitated increased contact with the children. The mother had only eight supervised visits in the previous three years, while the relocation order granted her three annual trips to visit the children to be paid for by the father.

Finally, the appellate court rejected the mother’s arguments that the trial court misunderstood or ignored relevant evidence and affirmed the decision allowing the father to relocate with the children.

Legal Framework: Section 609.2 IMDMA – Relocation Factors

When a parent seeks to relocate with a child, the court considers whether the move is in the best interest of the child. A relocation constitutes a substantial change in circumstances and may justify a modification to an existing parenting plan.

Under Section 609.2 of the IMDMA, the court weighs the following 11 factors:

1. Circumstances and reasons for the intended relocation;
2. Reasons, if any, why a parent is objecting to the relocation;
3. History and quality of each parent’s relationship with the child, including any refusal to exercise parental responsibilities;
4. Educational opportunities at the current and proposed locations;
5. Presence or absence of extended family at each location;
6. Anticipated impact of the relocation on the child;
7. Feasibility of reallocating parental responsibilities if relocation occurs;
8. Child’s wishes, considering maturity and ability to express reasoned preferences;
9. Possible parenting arrangements based on resources, circumstances, and child’s development;
10. Minimization of impairment to the parent-child relationship caused by the relocation;
11. Any other relevant factors bearing on the child’s best interests.

Key Takeaways

• Substantial Change: Relocation is considered a substantial change in circumstances that can warrant modification of parenting time.
• Best Interests Standard: Courts will analyze relocation through the lens of what best serves the child, not just the desires of either parent.
• Parental Access Considered Holistically: Even when relocation imposes physical distance, courts consider the totality of the parenting arrangement, including new opportunities for contact.
• Emergency Designation: A court may find an emergency based on case timing or other logistical needs, independent of how the parties plead their case.

Conclusion

In re Marriage of Norris serves as a strong example of how Illinois courts approach complex relocation disputes. The case underscores the importance of focusing on the child’s best interests and demonstrates that even in situations involving limited parental contact, courts can fashion arrangements that increase parenting opportunities and promote child welfare.

Why wait? Get Answers Now

If you or your former partner is considering relocation make sure you know your options. O. Long Law, LLC is here to help. Contact O. Long Law, LLC to schedule a consultation.