Child Custody Laws by State (2026)
About this article
Sourced from primary statutes (U.S. Code, CFR, state compiled statutes) and official government agency guidance. Written in plain language for general understanding — this is educational content, not legal advice. Our editorial standards
Compare by state
Statute citations are verified per state. Select a state to jump to its full section below.
| Primary statute | |
|---|---|
| Alabama | Ala. Code § 30-3-1 et seq. — Child Custody |
| Alaska | Alaska Child Custody Factors — Alaska Stat. § 25.20.060 |
| Arizona | A.R.S. § 25-403 — Arizona best interests factors for legal decision-making and parenting time |
| Arkansas | Arkansas Custody and Visitation, Ark. Code § 9-13-101 et seq. |
| California | California Family Code § 3011 — best interest factors for child custody |
| Colorado | C.R.S. § 14-10-124 — allocation of parental responsibilities (best interests factors) |
| Connecticut | CGS § 46b-56 — Child custody orders, best interests standard |
| Delaware | Delaware Child Custody Factors, 13 Del. C. § 722 |
| District of Columbia | D.C. Child Custody Best Interest Factors, D.C. Code § 16-914 |
| Florida | Florida Parental Responsibility and Time-Sharing, Fla. Stat. § 61.13 |
| Hawaii | Hawaii Child Custody Criteria — HRS § 571-46 |
| Idaho | Idaho Code § 32-717 — child custody best interests factors |
| Illinois | 750 ILCS 5/602.7 — Illinois best interest factors for allocation of parental responsibilities |
| Indiana | Indiana Code § 31-17-2-8 — best interest of child factors for custody |
| Iowa | Iowa Code § 598.41 — Custody of Children — Visitation Rights |
| Kansas | K.S.A. § 23-3222 — Child Custody Factors |
| Kentucky | KRS § 403.270 — Presumption of Joint Custody |
| Louisiana | Louisiana Civil Code Art. 134 — Best Interests of the Child |
| Maine | 19-A M.R.S.A. § 1653 — best interests factors in custody |
| Maryland | Maryland Child Custody, MD Code, Family Law § 5-203 |
| Massachusetts | MGL c. 208, § 31 — Massachusetts child custody factors; § 31A — domestic violence presumption |
| Michigan | Michigan Child Custody Act, MCL § 722.21 et seq. |
| Minnesota | Minn. Stat. § 518.17 — Best Interests of the Child Factors |
| Mississippi | Miss. Code Ann. § 93-5-24 — child custody (best interests standard) |
| Missouri | Missouri Child Custody Factors, RSMo § 452.375 |
| Montana | Mont. Code Ann. § 40-4-212 — child custody best interests factors |
| Nebraska | Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-2922 — Nebraska Parenting Act |
| Nevada | NRS 125C.003 — Presumption of Joint Physical Custody |
| New Hampshire | RSA 461-A:6 — best interests factors for child custody |
| New Jersey | NJ child custody best interest factors, N.J.S.A. 9:2-4 |
| New Mexico | NMSA § 40-4-9.1 — child custody |
| New York | NY Domestic Relations Law § 240 — custody and visitation in divorce |
| North Carolina | N.C. Gen. Stat. § 50-13.2 — Best interest of child standard |
| North Dakota | N.D. Cent. Code § 14-09-06.2 — Child Custody Factors |
| Oklahoma | Oklahoma Child Custody Statute, 43 Okl. St. § 109 et seq. |
| Oregon | Oregon Custody Best Interests Factors — ORS § 107.137 |
| Pennsylvania | Pennsylvania Child Custody Act — best interest factors, 23 Pa.C.S. § 5328 |
| Rhode Island | R.I. Gen. Laws § 15-5-16 — child custody (best interests standard) |
| South Carolina | S.C. Code § 63-15-10 et seq. — Child Custody |
| South Dakota | SDCL § 25-4-45.5 — Best Interests of the Child Factors |
| Tennessee | TCA § 36-6-106 — Child Custody Best Interest Factors |
| Texas | Texas Conservatorship (Custody) Law, Tex. Fam. Code §§ 153.001-153.317 |
| Utah | Utah Custody Factors — Utah Code § 30-3-10 |
| Vermont | 15 V.S.A. § 665 — Vermont custody best interest factors |
| Virginia | Virginia Custody and Visitation, Va. Code § 20-124.2 et seq. |
| Washington | RCW 26.09.002 — Parenting Plan |
| West Virginia | W. Va. Code § 48-9-101 et seq. — Child custody |
| Wisconsin | Wis. Stat. § 767.41 — Custody and Placement |
| Wyoming | Wyo. Stat. § 20-2-201 — child custody best interests factors |
What is this right?
When parents split, a court divides what the family did informally into two technical categories:
- Legal custody — who makes the big decisions about education, health care, and religion.
- Physical custody — where the child actually lives day to day.
Both can be sole or joint, and the two often get split differently. Joint legal custody with one primary physical custodian is one of the most common arrangements. The judge decides everything under the "best interest of the child" standard — each parent's relationship with the child, the stability of each home, the child's preferences (typically given weight starting around age 12–14, varying by state), and any history of abuse or neglect.
Modifying an existing order requires a modification petition and proof that circumstances have changed substantially — relocation, a change in the child's needs, a safety concern, a job loss. The Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA), adopted everywhere except Massachusetts, decides which state's court hears the case (almost always the child's "home state" — where they've lived for the past six months) and forces other states to enforce that decision.
When does it apply?
Custody rules apply when:
- You're divorcing or separating with minor children.
- You were never married to the other parent and need a formal arrangement.
- You need to change an existing order because something major has changed.
- The other parent is denying your court-ordered visitation.
- One parent wants to move to another state with the child.
Four myths worth killing:
- "Mothers always get custody." Not anymore. Most states have abandoned the old maternal preference, and many now have legal presumptions of joint custody.
- "If I move out, I lose custody." No. Leaving the marital home doesn't cost you custody. But leaving the children there for an extended time without filing for a court-ordered schedule does weaken your case.
- "The child picks." A child's preference can be a factor, especially around 12–14. But the judge decides on the best-interest standard. Even an articulate teenager doesn't get final say.
- "Joint custody means 50/50." Joint legal custody means shared decision-making. Joint physical custody can be 50/50 or any other split depending on schedule, distance, work, and the kids' needs.
What to Do If You're Facing a Child Custody Dispute
Step 1: File in the right state. The UCCJEA requires custody cases to be filed in the child's home state — generally where the child has lived for the past six months. File in the wrong state and the case gets dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
Step 2: Document your involvement. Pickups, drop-offs, doctor visits, parent-teacher conferences, who packs the lunches, who takes off work for sick days. Courts look hard at which parent has been doing the day-to-day work.
Step 3: Try mediation first. Many courts require it before trial. It's faster, cheaper, less destructive, and the agreements that come out of it tend to last because both parents helped build them.
Step 4: Build a detailed parenting plan. Schedule for weekdays, weekends, holidays, summer breaks, who handles what decisions on education, health, religion. The more specific, the fewer fights later.
Step 5: Hire a family law attorney for anything contested. Custody cases are technically complex and emotionally brutal. A good lawyer is worth their fee for the strategic advice alone.
Step 6: For modifications, file in the original court. The court that issued the order keeps jurisdiction. You need to show a substantial change in circumstances since the last order — not just preference.
What should you NOT do?
Don't withhold the kids without a court order. Even if you have a great reason, unilateral denial of court-ordered visitation can wreck your custody case and trigger contempt charges. Get the order modified, don't self-help.
Don't badmouth the other parent in front of the kids. Courts hate this and many states explicitly count a parent's "willingness to support the child's relationship with the other parent" as a best-interest factor. Vent to a therapist, not your kids.
Don't relocate without permission. Moving across state lines with the child without a court order can violate the UCCJEA and the Parental Kidnapping Prevention Act — a federal offense.
Don't ignore court orders. Contempt charges, fines, and in extreme cases a change of custody all flow from non-compliance. If the order is wrong, file to change it.
Don't post about the case on social media. Every photo of you holding a drink at a party, every angry post about your ex, every detail of court proceedings — all of it becomes Exhibit A at the next hearing.
Worked example
ScenarioTwo parents separate and can't agree on where their 8-year-old should live, so a court must decide custody.
OutcomeThe court applies the 'best interests of the child' standard — weighing each parent's relationship with the child, stability, the child's needs, and any safety concerns — rather than automatically favoring either parent. Many states encourage some form of shared parenting when it's safe and workable.
The best-interests standard is used in essentially every U.S. state, though the specific factors are set by each state's statute — see your state's section. Educational information, not legal advice; custody outcomes are highly fact-specific.
Common Questions
How do courts decide who gets custody?
By the 'best interests of the child' standard — not a parent's gender. Courts weigh each parent's caregiving history, the child's stability and needs, the ability to co-parent, and any history of abuse or neglect. The exact factors are set by your state's statute.
What's the difference between legal and physical custody?
Legal custody is the right to make major decisions (school, medical, religion); physical custody is where the child lives day to day. Each can be 'joint' (shared) or 'sole' (one parent). Many families have joint legal custody with one parent having primary physical custody.
Does my child get a say in custody?
Sometimes. Many states let a judge consider the preference of a child who is mature enough, often giving it more weight as the child gets older. The child's wishes are one factor among many — not the deciding one. See your state's section above for its approach.
Can a custody order be changed later?
Yes. Custody is modifiable if there's a significant change in circumstances — like a move, a change in a parent's situation, or safety concerns — and a change serves the child's best interests. You generally return to court to request a modification.
Do I need to go to court for custody?
Not always. Many parents agree on a parenting plan that a court then approves, and many states require mediation before a contested hearing. If you can't agree, a judge decides. Your state's section above explains the process where you live.
State-by-state details
Alabama
Primary statute: Ala. Code § 30-3-1 et seq. — Child Custody
Alabama custody law was significantly reformed by the Best Interest of the Child Protection Act (HB 229), effective January 1, 2026:
- Alabama now has a rebuttable presumption of joint legal and physical custody — the parent opposing joint custody must present evidence it would harm the child
- Joint physical custody is defined as equal or approximately equal parenting time
- Courts must provide specific written findings when deviating from joint custody
- A written parenting plan is required in every custody case
- The presumption does not apply retroactively to existing custody orders
Alaska
Primary statute: Alaska Child Custody Factors — Alaska Stat. § 25.20.060
Alaska child custody law prioritizes the best interests of the child:
- Alaska courts use the best interests of the child standard for all custody decisions
- Shared custody is encouraged — Alaska courts consider arrangements that allow both parents meaningful time
- Factors include each parent's physical, emotional, and mental health; the child's needs; stability of the home; and any history of domestic violence
- Alaska courts may consider the child's preference if the child is of suitable age and maturity
- Domestic violence creates a rebuttable presumption against custody for the perpetrator
Arizona
Primary statute: A.R.S. § 25-403 — Arizona best interests factors for legal decision-making and parenting time
Full Arizona guide →Arkansas
Primary statute: Arkansas Custody and Visitation, Ark. Code § 9-13-101 et seq.
Full Arkansas guide →California
Primary statute: California Family Code § 3011 — best interest factors for child custody
Full California guide →Colorado
Primary statute: C.R.S. § 14-10-124 — allocation of parental responsibilities (best interests factors)
Colorado child custody law uses the term "parental responsibilities" and focuses on the best interests of the child:
- Colorado uses the term "allocation of parental responsibilities" instead of "custody" (CRS § 14-10-124)
- This includes decision-making responsibility (legal custody) and parenting time (physical custody)
- The "best interests of the child" standard applies with specific statutory factors including: the wishes of the parents and child, the child's adjustment, the mental and physical health of all parties, and each parent's willingness to encourage the child's relationship with the other parent
- Colorado courts encourage joint decision-making when in the child's best interest
- Mediation is required before a contested hearing in most cases
- Domestic violence creates a rebuttable presumption against sole or joint decision-making for the abuser
Connecticut
Primary statute: CGS § 46b-56 — Child custody orders, best interests standard
Connecticut child custody law uses the best interests of the child standard:
- Connecticut courts use the best interests of the child standard
- Joint legal custody is common; joint physical custody is also available
- Factors include the child's temperament and developmental needs, each parent's ability, the child's adjustment, the child's wishes (if of sufficient age), and any history of domestic violence
- Connecticut courts may appoint a Guardian Ad Litem (GAL) to represent the child's interests
- Parenting plans are encouraged and often required
Delaware
Primary statute: Delaware Child Custody Factors, 13 Del. C. § 722
Delaware child custody law prioritizes the best interests of the child:
- Delaware courts use the best interests of the child standard
- Delaware has adopted the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA)
- Joint custody (legal and/or physical) is available and courts consider it favorably
- Factors include the wishes of the parents and child, the child's adjustment, the mental and physical health of all parties, and any history of domestic violence
- Delaware requires parent education classes in custody cases
District of Columbia
Primary statute: D.C. Child Custody Best Interest Factors, D.C. Code § 16-914
D.C. custody law uses statutory best interest factors:
- Best interest factors (D.C. Code § 16-914(a)(3)): Courts consider each parent's capacity to care for the child, the child's relationship with each parent, the child's adjustment to home and school, mental and physical health of all parties, and the child's preference (if of suitable age).
- No joint custody presumption: D.C. allows joint legal custody, joint physical custody, or sole custody. The court decides based on the facts of each case.
- Domestic violence consideration: If a parent committed an intrafamily offense, the court must treat this as a significant factor and may impose supervised visitation or deny custody (D.C. Code § 16-914(a)(3)(H)).
- De facto parent recognition: D.C. recognizes "de facto parent" status for non-biological parents who have served in a parental role, including stepparents and same-sex partners (D.C. Code § 16-831.01).
Florida
Primary statute: Florida Parental Responsibility and Time-Sharing, Fla. Stat. § 61.13
Florida replaced "custody" with "time-sharing" and parental responsibility in 2008:
- Fla. Stat. § 61.13: Courts use 20 statutory best interest factors to determine time-sharing, including each parent's capacity to facilitate a close relationship with the other parent, the physical and mental health of both parents, and the child's preference.
- No presumption for or against either parent: Florida law explicitly prohibits any presumption in favor of or against either the mother or the father (Fla. Stat. § 61.13(2)(c)).
- Shared parental responsibility: Florida presumes shared parental responsibility (joint decision-making) unless it would be detrimental to the child. A court may order sole parental responsibility if shared responsibility would harm the child.
- Parenting plan required: Both parents must submit a detailed parenting plan that includes a time-sharing schedule for overnights, holidays, and school breaks.
Hawaii
Primary statute: Hawaii Child Custody Criteria — HRS § 571-46
Hawaii child custody law uses the best interests standard with a presumption for joint custody:
- Courts apply the best interests of the child standard
- There is a statutory presumption favoring joint legal and physical custody unless one parent establishes that it is not in the child's best interests
- Hawaii courts consider the wishes of the parents and child, the child's adjustment, mental and physical health of all parties, and any history of domestic violence or substance abuse
- Hawaii's multicultural society and extended family traditions (ohana) may be considered in custody decisions
- The Family Court handles all custody matters
Idaho
Primary statute: Idaho Code § 32-717 — child custody best interests factors
Idaho child custody law focuses on the best interests of the child and favors joint custody:
- Idaho courts apply the best interests of the child standard
- There is a statutory presumption favoring joint legal custody (Idaho Code § 32-717B)
- Factors include the wishes of the parents and child, the child's adjustment to home and school, the mental and physical health of all parties, and any history of domestic violence
- A child's preference may be considered depending on age and maturity — there is no fixed age threshold
- Idaho requires parenting plans for all custody arrangements
Illinois
Primary statute: 750 ILCS 5/602.7 — Illinois best interest factors for allocation of parental responsibilities
Illinois modernized its custody law in 2016, replacing "custody" with "allocation of parental responsibilities":
- 750 ILCS 5/602.7: Courts evaluate 17 specific best interest factors, including each parent's willingness to facilitate a close relationship with the other parent, the child's adjustment to home and school, and the mental and physical health of all individuals.
- No custody labels: Illinois no longer uses "custody" or "visitation." Instead, courts allocate "parenting time" and "significant decision-making responsibility" (education, health, religion, extracurricular activities).
- Parenting plan required: Both parents must submit proposed parenting plans within 120 days of filing.
- Domestic violence presumption: If a court finds a pattern of domestic violence, there is a rebuttable presumption that allocating significant decision-making to the abusive parent is not in the child's best interest.
Indiana
Primary statute: Indiana Code § 31-17-2-8 — best interest of child factors for custody
Indiana child custody law uses the "best interests of the child" standard:
- Indiana courts determine custody based on the "best interests of the child" (IC § 31-17-2-8)
- Factors include: the age and sex of the child, the wishes of the parents and the child, the child's adjustment to home, school, and community, and the mental and physical health of all individuals
- Indiana courts may award joint legal custody (shared decision-making) and/or joint physical custody
- There is no presumption of joint custody — the court decides based on the evidence
- The child's wishes are considered if the child is of sufficient age and maturity (typically age 14+, but no fixed age)
- Indiana uses the Indiana Parenting Time Guidelines as a baseline for non-custodial parent visitation
Iowa
Primary statute: Iowa Code § 598.41 — Custody of Children — Visitation Rights
Iowa child custody law prioritizes the best interests of the child with a preference for joint custody:
- Iowa courts use the best interests of the child standard
- Iowa has a statutory preference for joint legal custody — the court must consider joint custody upon request of either parent
- Factors include the fitness of each parent, proximity of the parents' homes, the child's wishes, and any history of abuse
- Iowa courts may appoint a Guardian Ad Litem to represent the child's interests
- Domestic violence creates a rebuttable presumption against custody for the abusive parent
Kansas
Primary statute: K.S.A. § 23-3222 — Child Custody Factors
Kansas child custody law uses the best interests of the child standard:
- Kansas courts use the best interests of the child standard
- Joint legal custody is common; joint physical custody ("residency") is also available
- Kansas encourages parenting plans that detail custody, residency, and decision-making
- Factors include the parents' wishes, the child's wishes, the child's adjustment, and the mental and physical health of all involved
- Domestic violence is a significant factor that can affect custody determination
Kentucky
Primary statute: KRS § 403.270 — Presumption of Joint Custody
Kentucky has a strong presumption of joint custody:
- Kentucky enacted a presumption of equal (50/50) joint custody and parenting time in 2018 (KRS § 403.270)
- This is one of the strongest joint custody presumptions in the nation
- Courts consider best-interest factors including: child's wishes, parental fitness, domestic violence, and adjustment to community
- Either parent can rebut the presumption by showing joint custody is not in the child's best interest
Louisiana
Primary statute: Louisiana Civil Code Art. 134 — Best Interests of the Child
Louisiana custody law uses the best interests of the child standard under its civil law framework:
- Courts consider factors under La. Civ. Code Art. 134 including: child's emotional ties, stability, moral fitness, and child's preference
- Louisiana has a presumption of joint custody (La. R.S. § 9:335)
- Domiciliary parent (primary physical custodian) is designated when joint custody is awarded
- Relocation requires court approval under La. R.S. § 9:355.1 et seq.
Maine
Primary statute: 19-A M.R.S.A. § 1653 — best interests factors in custody
Maine child custody law uses the best interests standard and encourages shared parental rights:
- Courts apply the best interests of the child standard (19-A M.R.S.A. § 1653)
- Maine uses the term "parental rights and responsibilities" rather than "custody"
- Shared (joint) parental rights are encouraged where appropriate
- Factors include the child's age, relationship with each parent, stability, child's preference (if of sufficient age and maturity), each parent's willingness to cooperate, and any history of domestic abuse
- A Guardian ad Litem may be appointed in contested cases
- Maine requires mediation before contested custody hearings
Maryland
Primary statute: Maryland Child Custody, MD Code, Family Law § 5-203
Maryland child custody law prioritizes the best interests of the child with detailed factors:
- MD courts use the "best interest of the child" standard in all custody determinations
- Maryland considers factors including: fitness of each parent, character and reputation of each parent, material opportunities, age and health of the child, the child's preference (if of suitable age), and willingness to share custody
- MD recognizes legal custody (decision-making) and physical custody (residency)
- Joint custody is available when parents can communicate and cooperate
- There is no gender preference — both parents are considered equally
- Domestic violence is a significant factor in custody determinations
- Mediation may be ordered before a custody trial
Massachusetts
Primary statute: MGL c. 208, § 31 — Massachusetts child custody factors; § 31A — domestic violence presumption
Massachusetts child custody law focuses on the best interests of the child:
- MA courts use the "best interests of the child" standard in all custody determinations
- MA recognizes legal custody (decision-making) and physical custody (where the child lives)
- Shared legal custody is common; shared physical custody is awarded when it serves the child's best interests
- There is no gender preference — both parents have equal rights
- Courts consider the child's adjustment to home, school, and community; the mental and physical health of all parties; and the willingness of each parent to facilitate the child's relationship with the other parent
- Domestic violence is a significant factor — a pattern of abuse creates a rebuttable presumption against sole or shared custody for the abuser (MGL c. 208, § 31A)
Michigan
Primary statute: Michigan Child Custody Act, MCL § 722.21 et seq.
Michigan child custody law uses the "best interests of the child" standard with specific statutory factors:
- Michigan courts evaluate 12 statutory best-interest factors under MCL § 722.23, including: emotional ties, stability, moral fitness, home environment, and the child's preference
- Michigan recognizes both legal custody (decision-making) and physical custody (residence)
- Joint custody is favored and may be awarded at the request of either parent
- Michigan has a strong "established custodial environment" doctrine — courts are reluctant to change custody once a child is settled
- Parenting time (visitation) is a separate determination and should be "reasonable" to maintain the parent-child relationship
- Relocation (moving more than 100 miles) requires court approval
Minnesota
Primary statute: Minn. Stat. § 518.17 — Best Interests of the Child Factors
Minnesota child custody law uses the "best interests of the child" standard with 12 statutory factors:
- Minnesota evaluates factors under Minn. Stat. § 518.17 including: child's physical and emotional needs, each parent's ability, stability, child's preference (if of sufficient age), and domestic violence history
- Joint legal custody is presumed unless there is domestic abuse
- Joint physical custody is available but not presumed
- Minnesota uses the term "parenting time" rather than "visitation"
- Relocation (moving 100+ miles) requires court approval
Mississippi
Primary statute: Miss. Code Ann. § 93-5-24 — child custody (best interests standard)
Mississippi child custody law uses the best interests of the child standard:
- Mississippi courts use the best interests of the child standard from the Albright factors
- The Albright v. Albright factors include: age and health of the child, each parent's employment stability, continuity of care, moral fitness, and the child's preference
- Mississippi courts may consider the child's preference if the child is at least 12 years old
- Joint custody is available but is not presumed
- Domestic violence is a significant factor in custody determinations
Missouri
Primary statute: Missouri Child Custody Factors, RSMo § 452.375
Full Missouri guide →Montana
Primary statute: Mont. Code Ann. § 40-4-212 — child custody best interests factors
Montana child custody law uses the best interests standard and encourages joint custody:
- Courts apply the best interests of the child standard (Mont. Code Ann. § 40-4-212)
- Joint custody (legal and/or physical) is encouraged where the parents can cooperate
- Factors include the wishes of the parents and child, the child's adjustment to home and community, the mental and physical health of all parties, and any history of physical abuse or threat of abuse
- Montana does not have a fixed age at which a child's preference controls, but courts give increasing weight to preferences as children mature
- Montana requires parenting plans for all custody arrangements
Nebraska
Primary statute: Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-2922 — Nebraska Parenting Act
Nebraska child custody law emphasizes the best interests of the child and encourages joint custody:
- Nebraska courts use the best interests of the child standard for all custody decisions
- Joint legal and/or physical custody is encouraged, and courts must consider it when requested by either parent
- Nebraska requires a parenting plan to be submitted by each parent — this must address custody schedules, decision-making, and dispute resolution
- Factors include the relationship of each parent with the child, each parent's ability to provide, the child's adjustment, and any history of abuse
- Children's preferences may be considered based on maturity, though there is no specific age threshold
Nevada
Primary statute: NRS 125C.003 — Presumption of Joint Physical Custody
Nevada child custody law uses the best interests standard with a joint custody preference:
- Nevada courts use the best interests of the child standard
- Nevada has a presumption of joint physical custody — courts must award joint custody unless it would be detrimental to the child
- Factors include the child's wishes (if of sufficient age), each parent's ability, the child's adjustment, and any history of domestic violence
- Domestic violence creates a rebuttable presumption against custody for the perpetrator
- Relocation cases (moving more than 100 miles) require court approval
New Hampshire
Primary statute: RSA 461-A:6 — best interests factors for child custody
New Hampshire child custody law focuses on the best interests of the child:
- Courts apply the best interests of the child standard (RSA 461-A:6)
- Joint legal custody is considered and frequently awarded; courts look at both parents' ability to cooperate
- Factors include the relationship of each parent with the child, ability to provide a stable home, the child's developmental needs, and any history of abuse
- A Guardian ad Litem (GAL) may be appointed to represent the child's interests in contested cases
- Children's preferences may be considered based on maturity
- Parenting plans are required in all custody matters
New Jersey
Primary statute: NJ child custody best interest factors, N.J.S.A. 9:2-4
Full New Jersey guide →New Mexico
Primary statute: NMSA § 40-4-9.1 — child custody
New Mexico child custody law prioritizes the best interests of the child:
- New Mexico courts use the best interests of the child standard
- Joint custody is favored — New Mexico has a presumption that joint custody is in the best interests of the child unless there is evidence of domestic abuse
- Factors include the wishes of both parents and the child, the child's adjustment, and the mental and physical health of all parties
- Domestic violence creates a rebuttable presumption against custody for the abusive parent
- New Mexico requires parenting plans in all custody cases
New York
Primary statute: NY Domestic Relations Law § 240 — custody and visitation in divorce
New York custody decisions focus entirely on the best interest of the child:
- No statutory presumption: New York law does not presume joint or sole custody. The court examines all circumstances to find the arrangement that best serves the child.
- Key factors: Courts consider each parent's ability to provide for the child, the quality of the home environment, the child's wishes (especially for older children), each parent's mental and physical health, and any history of domestic violence (Domestic Relations Law § 240).
- Attorney for the child: New York appoints a separate attorney to represent the child's interests in custody disputes — not just a guardian ad litem — giving children an independent legal voice.
- Family Court vs. Supreme Court: Married parents file custody as part of divorce in Supreme Court. Unmarried parents file in Family Court under Family Court Act § 651.
North Carolina
Primary statute: N.C. Gen. Stat. § 50-13.2 — Best interest of child standard
North Carolina child custody law prioritizes the best interests of the child:
- NC courts consider the "best interest of the child" standard, weighing all relevant factors
- NC recognizes both legal custody (decision-making authority) and physical custody (where the child lives)
- Joint custody is available but not presumed — the court decides based on the child's best interest
- Either parent may file for custody in district court; there is no preference based on gender
- NC courts may consider the child's wishes if the child is of sufficient age and maturity
- Mediation is required before a custody hearing in most NC judicial districts (N.C. Gen. Stat. § 50-13.1)
- Custody orders can be modified if there is a substantial change in circumstances
North Dakota
Primary statute: N.D. Cent. Code § 14-09-06.2 — Child Custody Factors
North Dakota child custody law uses the best interests of the child standard with a preference for equal time:
- North Dakota courts use the best interests of the child standard
- North Dakota has a rebuttable presumption in favor of equal parenting time (N.D. Cent. Code § 14-09-29) — one of the strongest in the nation
- A parenting plan is required in all custody cases
- Factors include the love and emotional ties between parent and child, each parent's ability, the child's adjustment, and any domestic violence
- Domestic violence creates a rebuttable presumption against custody for the perpetrator
Oklahoma
Primary statute: Oklahoma Child Custody Statute, 43 Okl. St. § 109 et seq.
Oklahoma custody law uses the best interests of the child standard:
- Courts consider: child's physical and emotional needs, parental fitness, domestic violence, and child's preference
- Oklahoma does not presume joint custody, though it is available
- Mediation may be required
- Relocation requires 60 days' advance notice to the other parent
Oregon
Primary statute: Oregon Custody Best Interests Factors — ORS § 107.137
Oregon custody law uses the best interests of the child standard:
- Courts consider: emotional ties, parental interest and attitude, desirability of continuing existing relationships, abuse history, and the child's preference
- Oregon does not presume joint custody — the court decides based on the child's best interest
- Oregon requires a parenting plan
- Relocation requires court approval if it significantly impacts the other parent's time
Pennsylvania
Primary statute: Pennsylvania Child Custody Act — best interest factors, 23 Pa.C.S. § 5328
Pennsylvania custody law uses a comprehensive 16-factor best interest analysis:
- 23 Pa.C.S. § 5328: Courts must consider 16 statutory factors including: which parent is more likely to encourage contact with the other parent, the stability of the child's environment, the child's sibling relationships, and each parent's ability to provide a loving and stable home.
- Shared custody preferred: Pennsylvania courts generally favor shared custody arrangements that maximize both parents' involvement, unless safety concerns exist.
- Child's preference: Pennsylvania courts consider a child's well-reasoned preference, with the weight depending on the child's maturity (no fixed age requirement).
- Domestic violence factor: Any history of domestic violence by a party or household member is one of the 16 factors and is given significant weight.
Rhode Island
Primary statute: R.I. Gen. Laws § 15-5-16 — child custody (best interests standard)
Rhode Island child custody law uses the best interests of the child standard:
- Rhode Island courts use the best interests of the child standard
- Joint custody is available and courts consider it when requested by either parent
- Factors include the wishes of both parents and child, the child's relationship with each parent, the child's adjustment, and the mental and physical health of all involved
- Rhode Island courts may appoint a Guardian Ad Litem
- Domestic violence is a significant factor in custody determinations
South Carolina
Primary statute: S.C. Code § 63-15-10 et seq. — Child Custody
South Carolina custody law uses the best interests of the child standard:
- Courts consider all relevant factors including: child's needs, parental fitness, stability, domestic violence, and child's preference (if of sufficient age)
- SC does not presume joint custody — the court decides based on the child's best interest
- Mediation may be ordered before a custody hearing
- Custody can be modified upon showing a substantial change in circumstances
South Dakota
Primary statute: SDCL § 25-4-45.5 — Best Interests of the Child Factors
South Dakota child custody law uses the best interests of the child standard:
- South Dakota courts use the best interests of the child standard
- Joint legal custody is available; courts may also award joint physical custody
- Factors include the child's needs, the parents' ability to provide, the child's wishes, and any history of domestic violence or abuse
- South Dakota courts may consider the child's preference if the child is of sufficient age and maturity
- Domestic violence is a significant factor that weighs against custody
Tennessee
Primary statute: TCA § 36-6-106 — Child Custody Best Interest Factors
Tennessee child custody law uses a detailed set of factors to determine the best interests of the child:
- TN courts use the "best interest of the child" standard with 15 specific statutory factors (TCA § 36-6-106)
- TN recognizes primary residential parent (where the child primarily lives) and alternate residential parent
- Joint custody (shared parenting) is encouraged when in the child's best interest
- Tennessee requires a permanent parenting plan in all custody cases, specifying residential time, decision-making authority, and child support
- The child's reasonable wishes may be considered, depending on age and maturity (typically age 12+)
- Mediation is encouraged and may be ordered by the court before trial
Texas
Primary statute: Texas Conservatorship (Custody) Law, Tex. Fam. Code §§ 153.001-153.317
Texas uses the term "conservatorship" instead of custody:
- Joint Managing Conservatorship (JMC): Texas law presumes that appointing both parents as Joint Managing Conservators is in the child's best interest (Family Code § 153.131). One parent is designated as the "primary" conservator who decides where the child lives.
- Standard Possession Order (SPO): Texas has a detailed default visitation schedule (Family Code § 153.312) giving the non-primary parent the 1st, 3rd, and 5th weekends, Thursday evenings, and extended summer time.
- Geographic restriction: Courts commonly limit the child's residence to a specific county and neighboring counties. The primary conservator cannot move outside this area without court approval.
- Domestic violence exception: If there is credible evidence of domestic violence or child abuse, the JMC presumption does not apply (Family Code § 153.004).
Utah
Primary statute: Utah Custody Factors — Utah Code § 30-3-10
Utah child custody law uses the best interests of the child standard:
- Utah courts use the best interests of the child standard
- Joint legal custody is common; joint physical custody is also available
- Utah has statutory minimum parent-time schedules (Utah Code § 30-3-35)
- Factors include the past conduct and demonstrated moral standards of each parent, the child's needs, the quality of the parent-child relationship, and any domestic violence
- Children's preferences may be considered — Utah does not have a specific age threshold
Vermont
Primary statute: 15 V.S.A. § 665 — Vermont custody best interest factors
Vermont child custody law uses the best interests of the child standard:
- Vermont courts use the best interests of the child standard
- Joint legal and physical custody are both available
- Factors include the relationship between the child and each parent, the ability of each parent, the child's adjustment, and the quality of the child's current situation
- Vermont is known for its progressive approach to custody — including strong protections for LGBTQ+ parents
- Vermont courts may appoint a Guardian Ad Litem
Virginia
Primary statute: Virginia Custody and Visitation, Va. Code § 20-124.2 et seq.
Virginia child custody law uses the best interests of the child standard with specific statutory factors:
- Virginia courts consider 10 statutory factors under Va. Code § 20-124.3, including: age and needs of the child, the relationship with each parent, the role each parent has played in caregiving, and the child's reasonable preference
- Virginia recognizes both legal custody and physical custody, each of which can be sole or joint
- There is no presumption in favor of either parent based on sex
- Virginia courts consider the history of family abuse as a relevant factor
- Mediation is encouraged but not always required
- Relocation requires court approval if it would materially affect the other parent's visitation
- Virginia courts may appoint a guardian ad litem to represent the child's interests
Washington
Primary statute: RCW 26.09.002 — Parenting Plan
Washington uses a "parenting plan" model rather than traditional custody terminology:
- Washington does not use the term "custody" — instead, courts create a Parenting Plan that allocates decision-making authority and residential time
- The parenting plan addresses: where the child lives (residential schedule), how major decisions are made (education, healthcare, religion), and dispute resolution mechanisms
- Courts apply the "best interests of the child" standard, considering factors in RCW 26.09.187
- Washington has a statutory preference for maximizing each parent's time with the child
- Limitations on residential time are imposed for domestic violence, sexual abuse, neglect, substance abuse, or other factors that would endanger the child
- Relocation requires 60 days' notice and may be challenged in court
West Virginia
Primary statute: W. Va. Code § 48-9-101 et seq. — Child custody
Full West Virginia guide →Wisconsin
Primary statute: Wis. Stat. § 767.41 — Custody and Placement
Full Wisconsin guide →Wyoming
Primary statute: Wyo. Stat. § 20-2-201 — child custody best interests factors
Wyoming child custody law uses the best interests of the child standard:
- Wyoming courts use the best interests of the child standard
- Joint custody is available — Wyoming courts can award joint legal and/or physical custody
- Factors include the quality of the parent-child relationship, each parent's ability, the child's needs, and any domestic violence
- Wyoming courts may consider the child's preference if the child is of sufficient age and maturity
- Wyoming's rural nature means geographic distance can be a significant factor in custody arrangements
You Might Also Need to Know
Legal Resources
We may earn a commission if you use these services — at no extra cost to you. This supports our mission to make legal information free for everyone.