Divorced parents often worry about whether they are allowed to move out of the area if they have custody of their children. Fortunately, the California Legislature has a consistent focus on the “best interests of the child,” which permeates all aspects of family law in our state.
Section 7501 of the California Family Code very clearly states that a custodial parent “has the right to change the residence of the child.” The only counterbalance to this, by law, is that a court may “restrain a removal that would prejudice the rights or welfare of the child.”
The right of the custodial parent was not always this clear. In 1996, the California Supreme Court considered whether a custodial parent had to prove that her relocation was “necessary” in order to move away from the area.
In that case, Burgess v. Burgess, the parents agreed at a mediation that the mother would have sole physical custody of the child and that they would share joint legal custody, both on a temporary basis. Their agreement specifically provided for visitation if the mother left the county.
At a hearing several months later, the mother revealed that she was planning to move to a city 40 miles away as the result of a job transfer. Later that year, the court entered an order approving the mother’s move and granting the father enhanced visitation rights.
The first appellate court reversed this order, finding that the mother had failed to show that her move was necessary, instead only showing that it was more convenient for her to move out of the area.
The mother appealed to the California Supreme Court, which ruled in her favor. The state’s high court found that the custodial parent, the mother, was not legally required to prove that her move was necessary. Rather, under the applicable law, Section 7501, she had a presumptive right to move her children. No showing had been made that the move was not in the best interests of the children. Rather, the move would benefit the time she was able to spend with them as their primary caretaker, and their father would still be able to visit with them regularly.
After the Burgess case, the California Legislature specifically added to the law on residence changes that its intention was to declare the ruling in Burgess “to be the public policy and law of this state.”
The attorneys at The Law Offices of Judy L. Burger have extensive experience in family law, including requests of the custodial parent to move out of the area. Make the call today to learn how our attorneys can help you protect the best interests of your child: (415) 298-8314.
Establishing Paternity
In the much-publicized divorce of Katie Holmes and Tom Cruise, the tabloids found dozens of opportunities to photograph each parent out and about with their daughter Suri. It’s possible they were simply going about their daily lives while being hounded by the paparazzi, but it is just as likely the soon-to-be-divorced parents were trying to build their respective cases for custody.
When a marriage falls apart, the children of the relationship are caught in the middle. Parents often overlook the negative effect of their verbal sparring on the children. Courts, on the other hand, are not prone to overlook a parent’s bad behavior while the children are present.
Just as parents take measures to protect their children from negative outside influences, parents in the midst of a divorce have a duty to protect their children as much as possible. The children’s lives are going to change, but that doesn’t mean the children should be privy to all dirty laundry.
The details of a divorce should only be shared with children to the extent warranted by each child’s mental and emotional maturity level, and never in a manner reasonably expected to cause the child to harbor ill will for the other parent.
In our experience, children are flexible, adaptable, and perceptive. They may appear to be largely unaffected by your divorce, when in fact they have many questions they are simply afraid to ask. Counseling is often recommended after a divorce to help children process the break up of their parents and learn to deal with their conflicting emotions in a healthy way.
At the 
The stress of being a military member deployed overseas to a hostile environment can be compounded by worrying about children left behind in the care of others. The joy of finally coming home can quickly turn into a nightmare if an ex-spouse refuses to return a child. This subject was the basis for a recent ruling from a California Court of Appeal.
In the case entitled In re Marriage of E.U. and J.E., both of the parents are military members. When they divorced, the court awarded joint legal custody to both parents, with the father having primary physical custody. Anticipating the possibility of deployments for both parents, the court included provisions in the final order that if one parent deployed, then the other parent would assume the role of primary parent. The order further provided that when the deployment ended, custody would revert to pre-deployment status upon return of the deployed member.
As fate would have it, the father deployed and while he was away the mother filed for and was granted a temporary custody order. When the father returned, he commenced a long and arduous legal battle to regain primary custody of his child as originally ordered. Most recently, a California Court of Appeals found in the father’s favor and he regained custody of his child.
Interestingly, during the course of the proceedings, the California Legislature passed a statute requiring the return of a child in a situation such as this to the primary custody holder. Time will tell whether and to what extent this law will be challenged by those claiming a situation has changed and returning the child to a parent recently returned from deployment is contrary to the child’s best interest.
If litigation is necessary to protect a child’s best interest, then it should be commenced immediately.
At the 
Statistics compiled by 
