Moving with Sole Custody

[VirginiaMom]

What is the name of your state? Virginia

My son was awarded sole custody last fall of his 9 year old daughter; prior to that he had full custody for almost a year. In the final court case, the mother was awarded only supervised visitation (because, drugs). There is no set schedule, but she can only visit with her daughter at her mother's house because the maternal grandmother is the person the court named to supervise all visits. The grandmother requests an overnight every 4 - 6 weeks, but mom comes over to see daughter only every 3 or 4 months. Mom also has the ability to call and text their daughter as often as she wants, but seldom does.

The question today is whether at some point Dad has the ability to move his family to a different state for career or better prospects for his family. Is this allowed? He is currently in a medium sized city that has a pretty high crime rate and pretty low wages, so he is weighing options. Other than giving 30 days advance notice to the court and the mother, are there steps he needs to take if he ever determines a move is the best decision? Does he have to seek a hearing to ask the Court's permission, for instance?

Thanks for your thoughts and advice.

 

[Ohiogal]

He just needs to let mom and the court know. He also needs to keep allowing maternal grandmother time with the child. He may become solely responsible for transportation.

 

[Zigner]

What is the name of your state? Virginia

My son was awarded sole custody last fall of his 9 year old daughter; prior to that he had full custody for almost a year. In the final court case, the mother was awarded only supervised visitation (because, drugs). There is no set schedule, but she can only visit with her daughter at her mother's house because the maternal grandmother is the person the court named to supervise all visits. The grandmother requests an overnight every 4 - 6 weeks, but mom comes over to see daughter only every 3 or 4 months. Mom also has the ability to call and text their daughter as often as she wants, but seldom does.

The question today is whether at some point Dad has the ability to move his family to a different state for career or better prospects for his family. Is this allowed? He is currently in a medium sized city that has a pretty high crime rate and pretty low wages, so he is weighing options. Other than giving 30 days advance notice to the court and the mother, are there steps he needs to take if he ever determines a move is the best decision? Does he have to seek a hearing to ask the Court's permission, for instance?

Thanks for your thoughts and advice.

Please have dad log on to ask his own questions. I'm assuming he's an adult and can handle his own affairs...

 

[Zigner]

He just needs to let mom and the court know.

Yep - here is the law on that: https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title20/chapter6.1/section20-124.5/ (Just for dad's reference.)

He also needs to keep allowing maternal grandmother time with the child.

While it sounds like the "right" thing to do, I doubt there would be a legal requirement to do so. It doesn't sound like grandma has court-ordered visitation, rather, it sounds like grandma is the court appointed supervisor for mom's visits.

He may become solely responsible for transportation.

I also agree that the court may require him to pay for all transportation costs for visits.

 

[Ohiogal]

Yep - here is the law on that: https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title20/chapter6.1/section20-124.5/ (Just for dad's reference.)


While it sounds like the "right" thing to do, I doubt there would be a legal requirement to do so. It doesn't sound like grandma has court-ordered visitation, rather, it sounds like grandma is the court appointed supervisor for mom's visits.

I also agree that the court may require him to pay for all transportation costs for visits.

My point is legally he has to allow grandmother the child to supervise mom's visits. I shortcut it (thus misspeaking) because of a hearing starting. But yes you are right.

 

[zddoodah]

My son was awarded sole custody last fall of his 9 year old daughter; prior to that he had full custody for almost a year.

Please explain exactly what you think the difference is between "sole custody" and "full custody."

The question today is whether at some point Dad has the ability to move his family to a different state for career or better prospects for his family. Is this allowed? . . . Other than giving 30 days advance notice to the court and the mother, are there steps he needs to take if he ever determines a move is the best decision? Does he have to seek a hearing to ask the Court's permission, for instance?

Whether he has (or will, at some unstated point in the future, have) the ability to move and whether it would be permissible are two different questions, and no one here is in any position to opine intelligently about the former question. As for the latter question, what, if anything, does the operative custody order say about the custodial parent moving with the child? That question has to be answered for an informed response. Also, please explain why an out-of-state move would be preferable to an in-state move.

 

[quincy]

Ohiogal is a family law attorney. She is able to “opine intelligently” even if you can’t.

 

[LdiJ]

What is the name of your state? Virginia

My son was awarded sole custody last fall of his 9 year old daughter; prior to that he had full custody for almost a year. In the final court case, the mother was awarded only supervised visitation (because, drugs). There is no set schedule, but she can only visit with her daughter at her mother's house because the maternal grandmother is the person the court named to supervise all visits. The grandmother requests an overnight every 4 - 6 weeks, but mom comes over to see daughter only every 3 or 4 months. Mom also has the ability to call and text their daughter as often as she wants, but seldom does.

The question today is whether at some point Dad has the ability to move his family to a different state for career or better prospects for his family. Is this allowed? He is currently in a medium sized city that has a pretty high crime rate and pretty low wages, so he is weighing options. Other than giving 30 days advance notice to the court and the mother, are there steps he needs to take if he ever determines a move is the best decision? Does he have to seek a hearing to ask the Court's permission, for instance?

Thanks for your thoughts and advice.

If you google, "relocating children, Virginia", you will find lots of information on the subject. However, in general most states do have rules regarding relocation of children, and will put specific visitation schedules in place in order to be certain that they have regular contact with the other parent. It honestly is more complicated to relocate when the other parent is under supervision, because it is quite difficult to have a long distance visitation schedule when there is supervision involved. Some judges have even been known to take a parent off supervision in order to facilitate long distance visitation.

Considering the fact that your son has sole custody, he would likely get permission to move, but he will likely have to provide/pay for all travel expenses to allow mom regular visitation. I would not advise moving far enough away that he couldn't drive the child back for a weekend once a month or so. Life will be easier that way.

A normal long distance schedule is every other Thanksgiving Break, a week a Christmas, every or every other Spring Break, and 1/2 to 3/4th of the summer. Long weekends off from school are often included as well if distance and incomes permit. So, your son risks the child being away from him, with him in another state, for quite long periods of time if he moves far enough away that the judge determines that a fixed visitation schedule must be followed.

 

[Zigner]

If you google, "relocating children, Virginia", you will find lots of information on the subject. However, in general most states do have rules regarding relocation of children, and will put specific visitation schedules in place in order to be certain that they have regular contact with the other parent. It honestly is more complicated to relocate when the other parent is under supervision, because it is quite difficult to have a long distance visitation schedule when there is supervision involved. Some judges have even been known to take a parent off supervision in order to facilitate long distance visitation.

I hope the OP keeps in mind the fact that 82.7% of all "facts" on the internet are simply made up on the spot. If supervision is required, then supervision is required. Distance doesn't change that.

Considering the fact that your son has sole custody, he would likely get permission to move, but he will likely have to provide/pay for all travel expenses to allow mom regular visitation. I would not advise moving far enough away that he couldn't drive the child back for a weekend once a month or so. Life will be easier that way.

Why do you believe that the guy needs "permission" to move?

A normal long distance schedule is every other Thanksgiving Break, a week a Christmas, every or every other Spring Break, and 1/2 to 3/4th of the summer. Long weekends off from school are often included as well if distance and incomes permit. So, your son risks the child being away from him, with him in another state, for quite long periods of time if he moves far enough away that the judge determines that a fixed visitation schedule must be followed.

If you replace the word "normal" with the word "possible", then I'd agree.

 

[LdiJ]

I hope the OP keeps in mind the fact that 82.7% of all "facts" on the internet are simply made up on the spot. If supervision is required, then supervision is required. Distance doesn't change that.

We have seen cases on these forums where judge's rescinded supervision when the custodian parent relocated the child.

Why do you believe that the guy needs "permission" to move?

Are you picking at my wording or do you actually believe that he can relocate the child without either the permission of the other parent or the permission of the court?

If you replace the word "normal" with the word "possible", then I'd agree.

I stand by my original post.

 

[PayrollHRGuy]

I hope the OP keeps in mind the fact that 82.7% of all "facts" on the internet are simply made up on the spot.

Including this one. I'd be willing to bet the percentage is much higher.

 

[Zigner]

We have seen cases on these forums where judge's rescinded supervision when the custodian parent relocated the child.

Please point one out where the sole reason for rescission of the supervision was the relocation of the parent/child.

Are you picking at my wording or do you actually believe that he can relocate the child without either the permission of the other parent or the permission of the court?

The court requires notice only. Please read the law posted.

 

[LdiJ]

Please point one out where the sole reason for rescission of the supervision was the relocation of the parent/child.



The court requires notice only. Please read the law posted.

That is just plain stupid Zig. The purpose of notice is so that the other parent can legally object to the move. So, the other parent either chooses not to object (gives their permission) or chooses to legally object (requiring the court to decide). Either way, its a fact that the permission of the other parent, or the court's permission, is required. You deciding to play the semantics game doesn't change that.

 

[Zigner]

That is just plain stupid Zig. The purpose of notice is so that the other parent can legally object to the move. So, the other parent either chooses not to object (gives their permission) or chooses to legally object (requiring the court to decide). Either way, its a fact that the permission of the other parent, or the court's permission, is required. You deciding to play the semantics game doesn't change that.

YOU are the one playing semantics games in order to wiggle your way out of your misstatement. Your statement was that one must obtain permission, and that is just plain wrong. If your statement were right, then that means that one would have to actually RECEIVE permission. A failure to object is NOT the same as granting permission. If the LAW (this is a board that deals with the law) required "permission", then the law would state that it requires permission. All the law requires that that the other party is afforded the opportunity to object. That is NOT the same as receiving permission.

You're just plain wrong on this one. I know you hate to admit when you're wrong, but you can't wiggle out of this one.'


EDIT: Oh, I forgot. I guess I have to assume that you can't provide any information to back up your claim that folks on this board have had supervision removed solely based on the relocation of the custodial parent/child.

 

[LdiJ]

YOU are the one playing semantics games in order to wiggle your way out of your misstatement. Your statement was that one must obtain permission, and that is just plain wrong. If your statement were right, then that means that one would have to actually RECEIVE permission. A failure to object is NOT the same as granting permission. If the LAW (this is a board that deals with the law) required "permission", then the law would state that it requires permission. All the law requires that that the other party is afforded the opportunity to object. That is NOT the same as receiving permission.

You're just plain wrong on this one. I know you hate to admit when you're wrong, but you can't wiggle out of this one.'


EDIT: Oh, I forgot. I guess I have to assume that you can't provide any information to back up your claim that folks on this board have had supervision removed solely based on the relocation of the custodial parent/child.

I don't know the heck what is the matter with you today, but it not fair to the posters. Maybe you should give yourself a break.