Relocation of children after divorce and children's best interests: New evidence and legal considerations.

Abstract

Relocation cases, in which a divorced parent seeks to move away with the child, are among the knottiest problems facing family courts. The recent trend is to permit such moves, largely because of Wallerstein's (1995) controversial amica curiae brief, which a recent court (Baures v. Lewis, 2001) interpreted as supporting the conclusion that "in general, what is good for the custodial parent is good for the child" (p. 222). The current study provides the first direct evidence on relocation by dividing college students into groups on the basis of their divorced parents' move-away status. On most child outcomes, the ones whose parents moved are significantly disadvantaged. This suggests courts should give greater weight to the child's separate interests in deciding such cases.

A Critical Review of Relocation Research Specific to Separation and Divorce

“…Despite the commonality and complexity of relocation disputes within the field, there is little empirical research evidence on relocation that is specific to the context of separation and divorce to guide assessors when making recommendations to the court (Braver et al, 2003). Most research studies on relocation and local moves do not differentiate between separated and nonseparated populations (Pettit, 2004;Simpson & Fowler, 1994;South, Haynie, & Bose 2005;Wood, Halfon, Scarlata, Newacheck, & Nessim, 1993), yet many are cited in reference to separation and divorce-specific situations.…”

“…Austin (2012) highlighted the problems that can ensue when the courts and family law professionals extrapolate findings from nondivorced populations to relocation cases within the context of separation and divorce. Braver et al (2003) brought attention to the methodological weaknesses of the studies on which the court has typical relied. Bala and Wheeler (2012) opined that Canadian case law does not deal well with cases with conflicting presumptions.…”

“…Research that explores the impact of local moves on children in multiple contexts has been relied on within the court system in the absence of empirical evidence on the impact of relocation specific to the context of separation and divorce (Austin, 2008a(Austin, , 2008b(Austin, , 2012Braver et al, 2003;Kelly & Lamb, 2003;Wallerstein & Lewis, 1998), such as studies that have reported connections between a students' mobility and poorer academic and developmental outcomes (Wood et al, 1993). Caution is needed when interpreting these results and generalizing them to a separation and divorce context given that studies that examine mobility in general do not always account for mediators that could be affecting the negative outcomes associated in the literature with frequent mobility, such as employment issues or living in high-risk areas.…”

“…Her article argued for a presumption that the custodial parent should be allowed to relocate with a child, a presumption that continues to be supported to some extent despite key methodological flaws. It has since been determined that Wallerstein's research was based on a few low-quality studies that showed no association between child adjustment and the amount of father-child contact, and used her own small, nonrepresentative sample (Braver, Ellman, & Fabricius, 2003). Despite this selection bias, Wallerstein's article influenced a number of relocation dispute outcomes such as a New Jersey Supreme Court decision (Baures v. Lewis, 2001) where the court supported "the simple principle that, in general, what is good for the custodial parent is good for the child" (p. 28).…”

Children of Divorce: New Trends and Ongoing Dilemmas

“…State laws on relocation vary widely, with some states declaring a presumption permitting relocation and others declaring a presumption that precludes it (Braver, Ellman, & Fabricius, 2003). Currently, the majority of states favor a "best interests of the child" standard, with no presumptions attached (Elrod, 2006), though this direction is of little comfort to mental health professionals who work with the courts to determine the best interests of a particular child in a particular case.…”