How the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA) Protects Your Family
A parent’s worst nightmare is a missing or kidnapped child. Often, when we hear that another parent is responsible for the abduction, we may have fewer concerns, and chalk it up to a domestic dispute that will be resolved by the legal system.
For custodial parents who have primary custody, there are laws that prevent a caretaker (family member), spouse, or former partner from moving the child within the United States. Understanding the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA) laws and requirements can help your family resolve geographic disputes, and offer legal reassurance for custodial parents.
Why the Law Was Created
At inception, the intention of the UCCJEA was to help prevent instances of child removal or kidnapping by non-custodial parents. The UCCJEA was drafted in 1997 by the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, and was adopted into 49 U.S. States. In 2016, the only states that have not adopted the measures were Massachusetts and Puerto Rico.
The UCCJEA provides a designation of one “home state” for each child, regardless of where the parents or custodial guardians live. The UCCJEA replaced the “Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act” and provides additional protection for children as outlined in the Parental Kidnapping Prevention Act, which was created in 1980.
The laws of the “home state” pertain to the custody and care of the child in parental disputes. This allows for clarity in the legal process, allowing family care agencies to support the safety and well-being of the child without disputing which state laws (as they vary) may apply to the determination of custody for the child
How Is Custody and Jurisdiction Determined?
In geographic disputes, the court seeks to identify which state the child has become tethered to, both by family members, financial means, health care, education, and other criteria. The initial custody determination allows families and the court to determine the geographic area of residence for the child.
There are three steps that conclude the determination of custody:
1. Belonging to the home state of the child, which was where the child resided with his or her family members for the period of six months prior to custody proceedings or address change. If the child remained within one state for that six-month period, that state would be determined as legally “home.”
2. In cases where the child was transient between multiple states, and did not reside within one specific state for the six-month period (preceding custody hearing), the ties to a geographic region are considered. For instance, if the child has completed several years of education within the state, that may be a supporting factor to determine the legal “home” of the child.
3. If the criteria of the first two options are not determined, then the “home state” can be determined by other factors. These may include the presence of a family physician with medical and treatment history with the child, presence of multiple family members within the state (familial support), bank accounts and assets, or other ties linking the child to the state.
In certain high-risk cases, or where there is malicious intent by one of the parents, an emergency determination of the “home state” for the child can be decided by the court. This occurs when orders for safety, or the removal from the home environment is required by child protective services, and the procedures and laws of the “home state” apply in emergency custody.
How the UCCJEA Protects Families
Before 1968, a parent or caregiver was able to advantageously remove a child from a residential state to another state where the laws were different. The courts would assume legal proceedings within the state that the child was currently residing in. The problem with that method was that it inadvertently encouraged non-custodial parents to flee the state of the initial custody order, and attempt to modify the terms where laws were more flexible. This could pertain to both physical custody as well as orders for financial support, a practice called “forum shopping” or the ability to choose a state where the laws better suit your needs (or conflict with previous court orders).
Today, a child would have to remain in that state for a six-month period or longer, before the court would consider applying the rules of the “home state” to the non-custodial parent. As law enforcement agencies are committed to returning children (with reciprocal agreements between all states in America), it would be difficult for a non-custodial or abducting parent to retain custody of the child for that period of time.
This method also removes the delay and expense of debating or arguing jurisdiction in a custody dispute, and helps to expedite a legal warrant for the return of the child, allowing custodial parents to be reunited in a prompt manner. It has been recognized as a nationally effective deterrent for parental child abduction.