House
File
2002
-
Introduced
HOUSE
FILE
2002
BY
KAUFMANN
A
BILL
FOR
An
Act
relating
to
modification
of
a
custody
order
based
on
the
1
relocation
of
a
parent.
2
BE
IT
ENACTED
BY
THE
GENERAL
ASSEMBLY
OF
THE
STATE
OF
IOWA:
3
TLSB
5124YH
(3)
85
pf/nh
H.F.
2002
Section
1.
Section
598.21D,
Code
2014,
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
5124YH
(3)
85
pf/nh
1/
3
H.F.
2002
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
The
inclusion
of
this
explanation
does
not
constitute
agreement
with
19
the
explanation’s
substance
by
the
members
of
the
general
assembly.
20
This
bill
amends
provisions
relating
to
relocation
of
a
21
parent
as
grounds
for
modification
of
a
child
custody
order.
22
Current
law
provides
that
if
a
parent
who
has
been
awarded
23
joint
legal
custody
and
physical
care
or
sole
legal
custody
is
24
relocating
the
residence
of
the
minor
child
to
a
location
which
25
is
150
miles
or
more
from
the
residence
of
the
minor
child
26
at
the
time
that
custody
was
awarded,
the
court
may
consider
27
the
relocation
a
substantial
change
in
circumstances.
The
28
bill
provides
that
if
the
court
determines
that
the
relocation
29
is
a
substantial
change
in
circumstances,
in
determining
the
30
best
interest
of
the
child,
the
court
may
modify
the
existing
31
order
that
awarded
joint
legal
custody
and
physical
care
to
32
the
relocating
parent
and
instead
award
joint
legal
custody
33
and
physical
care
to
the
nonrelocating
parent,
if
the
court
34
finds
that,
in
regard
to
the
level
of
care
provided
by
each
35
-2-
LSB
5124YH
(3)
85
pf/nh
2/
3
H.F.
2002
parent,
the
care
provided
by
the
nonrelocating
parent
is
equal
1
to
the
level
of
care
provided
by
the
relocating
parent.
If
the
2
court
does
modify
the
order
and
awards
joint
legal
custody
and
3
physical
care
to
the
nonrelocating
parent,
the
court
is
also
to
4
modify
the
custody
order
to
preserve,
as
nearly
as
possible,
5
the
existing
relationship
between
the
minor
child
and
the
6
relocating
parent.
Additionally,
if
the
order
is
modified,
the
7
order
may
include
a
provision
for
extended
visitation
during
8
summer
vacations
and
school
breaks
and
scheduled
telephone
9
contact
between
the
relocating
parent
and
the
minor
child.
10
The
modification
may
also
include
a
provision
assigning
the
11
responsibility
for
transportation
of
the
minor
child
for
12
visitation
purposes
to
either
or
both
parents.
13
Current
law
is
retained
regarding
modification
of
the
14
order
in
a
manner
that
retains
the
award
of
custody
with
the
15
relocating
parent
and
the
provisions
relating
to
preserving
the
16
existing
relationship
with
the
nonrelocating
parent,
extended
17
vacations
and
school
breaks,
telephone
contact,
and
provision
18
for
transportation
of
the
minor
child
for
visitation
purposes
19
to
either
or
both
parents.
20
The
bill
amends
the
provision
relating
to
posting
of
a
cash
21
bond
based
on
past
interference
by
the
relocating
parent
to
22
apply
to
both
parents.
23
-3-
LSB
5124YH
(3)
85
pf/nh
3/
3