Highest Court Changes Standard for Divorced Parent Wanting to Leave NJ

A New Jersey Supreme Court set a new standard last year for when a divorced parent can relocate to a new state. The new standard overturns two decades of precedent and now focuses on whether the move would be in the “best interest of the child.” The new standard adopted by the New Jersey court now uniformly applies the “best interest of the child” standard to all family law matters dealing with children and child custody.

Historically, courts have been reluctant to allow a parent to move a child out-of-state and further away from the non-custodial parent. Concerned that the child’s relationship with the non-custodial parent would deteriorate, the New Jersey Supreme Court set a fairly high bar for parents seeking to relocate their children.

Baures and the No Harm to the Child Standard

That changed in 2001 when the New Jersey Supreme Court revisited the issue in Baures v. Lewis. The New Jersey court reasoned that focusing exclusively on the well-being of the child was short-sighted. Citing recent studies in social science, the Court determined that what is best for the custodial parent will be best for the child – or, more simply, if moving makes a happy parent, then moving will also make a happy child. The court described the advances in technology and modes of communication that would allow a parent and child to maintain a close, healthy relationship even from a different part of the country. 

Bisbing and “The Best Interest of the Child” Standard

In August 2017, the New Jersey Supreme Court changed its mind, once again, in Bisbing vs. Bisbing. Under Bisbing, the Court said the new standard for when a custodial parent seeks to relocate to another state would be whether that move would be in the “best interest of the child.” The Court gave several reasons for reversing its decades-old precedent. First, the once-emerging social science that supposedly proved a child would be happier if his or her parent was happier was never fully settled. Second, while communication and technology have made even further advances in the preceding decades, the nationwide trend to allow parents the freedom to move eventually halted and then reversed itself. Last, because the rest of family law issues dealing with children apply the “best interest of the child standard,” it seemed inappropriate not to apply the standard to this one specific area of child custody law.

Now, when considering what is in the “Best Interest of the Child,” the Court will look at the following factors:

●       The parents’ ability to cooperate and communicate regarding their child

●       The parents’ history of allowing or disallowing parenting time

●       The child’s relationship with their parents and any siblings

●       Any history of domestic violence

●       Any safety concerns for the child

●       The preference of the child

●       The needs of the child

●       The stability of the child’s home environment

●       The quality and continuity of the child’s education

●       The fitness of the parents

●       The amount of quality interaction the child has with each parent prior to the separation

●       The parents’ employment responsibilities

●       The age and number of the children

The Court then goes on to state that “any other relevant factor” may be considered. In short, the Court will focus squarely on what is in the best interest of the child and make its decision from that point.