Bills › 90th General Assembly
Relating to relocation of a minor child’s residence outside the minor child’s established school district
Where it is now
- Done: IntroducedJanuary 24, 2023
- Done: SubcommitteeJanuary 30, 2023
- Stopped: Senate committeeDied when the General Assembly ended
- Next: Passes the Senate
- Next: House committee
- Next: Passes the House
- Next: To the Governor
- Next: Signed into law
Died when the session ended The 2024 session adjourned on April 19, 2024, the General Assembly’s last regular session. Bills that didn’t pass both chambers died. What’s a funnel?
What’s in it
This bill relates to the relocation of a minor child’s residence outside the minor child’s established school district for the purposes of child custody.21D provides that the relocation of the residence of a minor child to a location which is 150 miles or more from the minor child’s established residence may be considered by the court as a possible substantial change in circumstances for purposes of modification of a child custody order.21D are not applicable, and the intended relocation of a parent awarded joint legal custody and physical care or sole legal custody specifically results in relocating the residence of the minor child to a location which is outside the minor child’s school district as established at the time custody was awarded, the relocating parent shall provide days’ advance written notice of the intended relocation to the court and to the nonrelocating parent.
Read the full explanation
The court shall consider the relocation a substantial change in circumstances. The court shall, upon motion of either party, schedule a hearing to review the notice of relocation to determine if the relocation is in the best interest of the child. The burden of proving that relocation of the residence of the minor child is in the best interest of the child is on the relocating parent. The court’s primary consideration in determining if the relocation is in the best interest of the child shall be the effect of the relocation on the child’s opportunity for maximum continuous physical and emotional contact with both parents rather than any benefit to the relocating parent from employment opportunities or personal relationships. If the court determines the relocation is in the best interest of the child, the court may modify the custody order to, at a minimum, preserve, as nearly as possible, the existing relationship between the minor child and the nonrelocating parent. The order may include a provision assigning the responsibility for transportation of the minor child for visitation purposes to the relocating parent. If the court determines the relocation is not in the best interest of the child, the bill provides that upon the request of the nonrelocating parent, alternatives for modification are available based on whether the nonrelocating parent has joint legal custody but was not awarded physical care or the relocating parent has sole custody of the minor child. If the nonrelocating parent has joint legal custody but was not awarded physical care, the court may modify the custody order to award physical care to the nonrelocating parent and to provide visitation to the relocating parent to, at a minimum, preserve, as nearly as possible, the existing relationship between the minor child and the relocating parent; alternatively, the court may maintain the award of joint legal custody and physical care with the relocating parent and at a minimum, preserve, as nearly as possible, the existing relationship between the minor child and the nonrelocating parent. If the court determines the relocation is not in the best interest of the child and the relocating parent has sole legal custody, upon request of the nonrelocating parent, the court shall modify the custody order to provide increased visitation to the nonrelocating parent in addition to that provided under the existing custody order and may include a provision assigning the responsibility for transportation of the minor child for visitation purposes to the relocating parent.
Senate subcommittee
Named January 30, 2023. On February 15, 2023 it recommended amendment and passage. [].
Three legislators hear a bill first and recommend what the committee should do; it’s the best time to weigh in. How to take part
Iowa Code it changes
Creates§598.21H
Lobbying
4 for · 0 against · 4 undecided · Who →
Family tree
Tried before
90th General Assembly
Earlier and later bills are matched by wording or an identical title.
Tried before
This idea has been filed in an earlier General Assembly. None got through a chamber.
- SF 2041 Relating to relocation of a minor child’s residence outside the minor child’s established …89th General Assembly · In committee · same titleCleared committee
Matched by wording or an identical title.