H.F. 249 Section 1. Section 598.21D, Code 2011, is amended to read 1 as follows: 2 598.21D Relocation of parent as grounds to modify order of 3 child custody —— level of care consideration in modifying . 4 1. If a parent awarded joint legal custody and physical 5 care or sole legal custody is relocating the residence of the 6 minor child to a location which is one hundred fifty miles or 7 more from the residence of the minor child at the time that 8 custody was awarded, the court may consider the relocation a 9 substantial change in circumstances. 10 2. If the court determines that the relocation is a 11 substantial change in circumstances, in determining the best 12 interest of the child, the court may modify an existing order 13 that awarded joint legal custody and physical care to the 14 relocating parent and instead award joint legal custody and 15 physical care to the nonrelocating parent, if the court finds 16 that, in regard to the level of care provided by each parent, 17 the level of care provided by the nonrelocating parent is equal 18 to the level of care provided by the relocating parent. If 19 the court modifies the order and awards joint legal custody 20 and physical care to the nonrelocating parent, the court shall 21 modify the custody order to, at a minimum, preserve, as nearly 22 as possible, the existing relationship between the minor child 23 and the relocating parent. If modified, the order may include 24 a provision for extended visitation during summer vacations 25 and school breaks and scheduled telephone contact between 26 the relocating parent and the minor child. The modification 27 may include a provision assigning the responsibility for 28 transportation of the minor child for visitation purposes to 29 either or both parents. 30 3. If the court determines that the relocation is a 31 substantial change in circumstances, and the court modifies the 32 custody order retaining the provisions of the order awarding 33 joint legal custody and physical care or sole legal custody to 34 the relocating parent, the court shall modify the custody order 35 -1- LSB 2286YH (3) 84 pf/nh 1/ 3

H.F. 249 to, at a minimum, preserve, as nearly as possible, the existing 1 relationship between the minor child and the nonrelocating 2 parent. If modified, the order may include a provision for 3 extended visitation during summer vacations and school breaks 4 and scheduled telephone contact between the nonrelocating 5 parent and the minor child. The modification may include a 6 provision assigning the responsibility for transportation of 7 the minor child for visitation purposes to either or both 8 parents. 9 4. If the court makes a finding of past interference by 10 the a parent awarded joint legal custody and physical care 11 or sole legal custody with the minor child’s access to the 12 other parent, the court may order the posting of a cash bond to 13 assure future compliance with the visitation provisions of the 14 decree. The supreme court shall prescribe guidelines for the 15 forfeiting of the bond and restoration of the bond following 16 forfeiting of the bond. 17 EXPLANATION 18 This bill amends provisions relating to relocation of a 19 parent as grounds for modification of a child custody order. 20 Current law provides that if a parent who has been awarded 21 joint legal custody and physical care or sole legal custody is 22 relocating the residence of the minor child to a location which 23 is 150 miles or more from the residence of the minor child 24 at the time that custody was awarded, the court may consider 25 the relocation a substantial change in circumstances. The 26 bill provides that if the court determines that the relocation 27 is a substantial change in circumstances, in determining the 28 best interest of the child, the court may modify the existing 29 order that awarded joint legal custody and physical care to 30 the relocating parent and instead award joint legal custody 31 and physical care to the nonrelocating parent, if the court 32 finds that, in regard to the level of care provided by each 33 parent, the care provided by the nonrelocating parent is equal 34 to the level of care provided by the relocating parent. If the 35 -2- LSB 2286YH (3) 84 pf/nh 2/ 3

H.F. 249 court does modify the order and awards joint legal custody and 1 physical care to the nonrelocating parent, the court is also to 2 modify the custody order to preserve, as nearly as possible, 3 the existing relationship between the minor child and the 4 relocating parent. Additionally, if the order is modified, the 5 order may include a provision for extended visitation during 6 summer vacations and school breaks and scheduled telephone 7 contact between the relocating parent and the minor child. 8 The modification may also include a provision assigning the 9 responsibility for transportation of the minor child for 10 visitation purposes to either or both parents. 11 Current law is retained regarding modification of the 12 order in a manner that retains the award of custody with the 13 relocating parent and the provisions relating to preserving the 14 existing relationship with the nonrelocating parent, extended 15 vacations and school breaks, telephone contact, and provision 16 for transportation of the minor child for visitation purposes 17 to either or both parents. 18 The bill amends the provision relating to posting of a cash 19 bond based on past interference by the relocating parent to 20 apply to both parents. 21 -3- LSB 2286YH (3) 84 pf/nh 3/ 3