Senate
File
2041
-
Introduced
SENATE
FILE
2041
BY
DICKEY
A
BILL
FOR
An
Act
relating
to
relocation
of
a
minor
child’s
residence
1
outside
the
minor
child’s
established
school
district.
2
BE
IT
ENACTED
BY
THE
GENERAL
ASSEMBLY
OF
THE
STATE
OF
IOWA:
3
TLSB
5157XS
(9)
89
pf/rh
S.F.
2041
Section
1.
NEW
SECTION
.
598.21H
Relocation
of
minor
child’s
1
residence
outside
established
school
district
——
modification
of
2
order
of
child
custody.
3
1.
If
the
provisions
of
section
598.21D
are
not
applicable,
4
and
the
intended
relocation
of
a
parent
awarded
joint
legal
5
custody
and
physical
care
or
sole
legal
custody
results
6
specifically
in
relocating
the
residence
of
the
minor
child
7
to
a
location
outside
the
minor
child’s
school
district
as
8
established
at
the
time
custody
was
awarded,
the
relocating
9
parent
shall
provide
sixty
days’
advance
written
notice
of
10
the
intended
relocation
to
the
court
and
to
the
nonrelocating
11
parent.
The
court
shall
consider
the
relocation
a
substantial
12
change
in
circumstances.
13
2.
The
court
shall,
upon
motion
of
either
party,
schedule
a
14
hearing
to
review
the
notice
of
relocation
to
determine
if
the
15
relocation
is
in
the
best
interest
of
the
child.
The
burden
of
16
proving
that
relocation
of
the
residence
of
the
minor
child
is
17
in
the
best
interest
of
the
child
is
on
the
relocating
parent.
18
The
court’s
primary
consideration
in
determining
if
the
19
relocation
is
in
the
best
interest
of
the
child
shall
be
the
20
effect
of
the
relocation
on
the
child’s
opportunity
for
maximum
21
continuous
physical
and
emotional
contact
with
both
parents
22
rather
than
any
benefit
to
the
relocating
parent
relating
to
23
employment
opportunities
or
personal
relationships.
24
3.
If
the
court
determines
the
relocation
is
in
the
best
25
interest
of
the
child,
the
court
may
modify
the
custody
order
26
to,
at
a
minimum,
preserve,
as
nearly
as
possible,
the
existing
27
relationship
between
the
minor
child
and
the
nonrelocating
28
parent.
The
order
may
include
a
provision
assigning
the
29
responsibility
for
transportation
of
the
minor
child
for
30
visitation
purposes
to
the
relocating
parent.
31
4.
If
the
court
determines
the
relocation
is
not
in
the
32
best
interest
of
the
child
and
the
nonrelocating
parent
has
33
joint
legal
custody,
but
has
not
been
awarded
physical
care,
34
the
court
may,
upon
request
of
the
nonrelocating
parent,
do
one
35
-1-
LSB
5157XS
(9)
89
pf/rh
1/
4
S.F.
2041
of
the
following:
1
a.
Modify
the
custody
order
to
award
physical
care
to
2
the
nonrelocating
parent
and
to
provide
visitation
to
the
3
relocating
parent
to,
at
a
minimum,
preserve,
as
nearly
as
4
possible,
the
existing
relationship
between
the
minor
child
and
5
the
relocating
parent.
6
b.
Modify
the
custody
order
to
maintain
the
award
of
joint
7
legal
custody
and
physical
care
with
the
relocating
parent
and,
8
at
a
minimum,
preserve,
as
nearly
as
possible,
the
existing
9
relationship
between
the
minor
child
and
the
nonrelocating
10
parent.
The
order
may
include
a
provision
assigning
the
11
responsibility
for
transportation
of
the
minor
child
for
12
visitation
purposes
to
the
relocating
parent.
13
5.
If
the
court
determines
the
relocation
is
not
in
the
best
14
interest
of
the
child
and
the
relocating
parent
has
sole
legal
15
custody,
upon
request
of
the
nonrelocating
parent,
the
court
16
may
modify
the
custody
order
to
provide
increased
visitation
to
17
the
nonrelocating
parent
in
addition
to
that
provided
under
the
18
existing
custody
order
and
may
include
a
provision
assigning
19
the
responsibility
for
transportation
of
the
minor
child
for
20
visitation
purposes
to
the
relocating
parent.
21
EXPLANATION
22
The
inclusion
of
this
explanation
does
not
constitute
agreement
with
23
the
explanation’s
substance
by
the
members
of
the
general
assembly.
24
This
bill
relates
to
the
relocation
of
a
minor
child’s
25
residence
outside
the
minor
child’s
established
school
district
26
for
the
purposes
of
child
custody.
27
Under
current
law,
Code
section
598.21D
provides
that
28
the
relocation
of
the
residence
of
a
minor
child
to
a
29
location
which
is
150
miles
or
more
from
the
minor
child’s
30
established
residence
may
be
considered
by
the
court
as
a
31
possible
substantial
change
in
circumstances
for
purposes
of
32
modification
of
a
child
custody
order.
Under
the
bill,
if
33
those
provisions
of
Code
section
598.21D
are
not
applicable,
34
and
the
intended
relocation
of
a
parent
awarded
joint
legal
35
-2-
LSB
5157XS
(9)
89
pf/rh
2/
4
S.F.
2041
custody
and
physical
care
or
sole
legal
custody
specifically
1
results
in
relocating
the
residence
of
the
minor
child
to
a
2
location
which
is
outside
the
minor
child’s
school
district
as
3
established
at
the
time
custody
was
awarded,
the
relocating
4
parent
shall
provide
60
days’
advance
written
notice
of
the
5
intended
relocation
to
the
court
and
to
the
nonrelocating
6
parent.
The
court
shall
consider
the
relocation
a
substantial
7
change
in
circumstances.
8
The
court
shall,
upon
motion
of
either
party,
schedule
a
9
hearing
to
review
the
notice
of
relocation
to
determine
if
the
10
relocation
is
in
the
best
interest
of
the
child.
The
burden
11
of
proving
that
relocation
of
the
residence
of
the
minor
child
12
is
in
the
best
interest
of
the
child
is
on
the
relocating
13
parent.
The
court’s
primary
consideration
in
determining
if
14
the
relocation
is
in
the
best
interest
of
the
child
shall
be
15
the
effect
of
the
relocation
on
the
child’s
opportunity
for
16
maximum
continuous
physical
and
emotional
contact
with
both
17
parents
rather
than
any
benefit
to
the
relocating
parent
from
18
employment
opportunities
or
personal
relationships.
19
If
the
court
determines
the
relocation
is
in
the
best
20
interest
of
the
child,
the
court
may
modify
the
custody
order
21
to,
at
a
minimum,
preserve,
as
nearly
as
possible,
the
existing
22
relationship
between
the
minor
child
and
the
nonrelocating
23
parent.
The
order
may
include
a
provision
assigning
the
24
responsibility
for
transportation
of
the
minor
child
for
25
visitation
purposes
to
the
relocating
parent.
26
If
the
court
determines
the
relocation
is
not
in
the
best
27
interest
of
the
child,
the
bill
provides
that
upon
the
request
28
of
the
nonrelocating
parent,
alternatives
for
modification
29
are
available
based
on
whether
the
nonrelocating
parent
has
30
joint
legal
custody
but
was
not
awarded
physical
care
or
the
31
relocating
parent
has
sole
custody
of
the
minor
child.
If
32
the
nonrelocating
parent
has
joint
legal
custody
but
was
33
not
awarded
physical
care,
the
court
may
modify
the
custody
34
order
to
award
physical
care
to
the
nonrelocating
parent
35
-3-
LSB
5157XS
(9)
89
pf/rh
3/
4
S.F.
2041
and
to
provide
visitation
to
the
relocating
parent
to,
at
1
a
minimum,
preserve,
as
nearly
as
possible,
the
existing
2
relationship
between
the
minor
child
and
the
relocating
parent;
3
alternatively,
the
court
may
maintain
the
award
of
joint
legal
4
custody
and
physical
care
with
the
relocating
parent
and
at
5
a
minimum,
preserve,
as
nearly
as
possible,
the
existing
6
relationship
between
the
minor
child
and
the
nonrelocating
7
parent.
If
the
court
determines
the
relocation
is
not
in
the
8
best
interest
of
the
child
and
the
relocating
parent
has
sole
9
legal
custody,
upon
request
of
the
nonrelocating
parent,
the
10
court
shall
modify
the
custody
order
to
provide
increased
11
visitation
to
the
nonrelocating
parent
in
addition
to
that
12
provided
under
the
existing
custody
order
and
may
include
a
13
provision
assigning
the
responsibility
for
transportation
of
14
the
minor
child
for
visitation
purposes
to
the
relocating
15
parent.
16
-4-
LSB
5157XS
(9)
89
pf/rh
4/
4