The key is to avoid a court in another state deciding your child custody dispute. The Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA) is a law that has been adopted by every state but Massachussetts. The key concepts of this law are the child’s “home state” and “continuing and exclusive jurisdiction.” The term “home state” is the place where the child lived for the six months just before someone filed a custody case in court. “Continuing and exclusive jurisdiction” is the idea that once the courts of one state have ruled on custody, that state will be the only one that is allowed to make further decisions about custody.

The home state idea has a couple of special situations. One is when the child is less than six months old. The other is when the child has lived in more than one state in the six months before the case is filed.

In the case of newborns, the home state is defined as the state “in which the child lived from birth with any of the persons mentioned.” This phrase is unclear. If, for example, the child is 5 months old and lived with a parent in one state from the date of birth to the age of one month then moved to another state, the phrase would appear to make the state of birth the home state, even though the child has actually lived longer in the second state.

In the case of children who have moved within the last six months but prior to the move had lived in one state for six months, then that state would continue to be the home state until the child has lived six months in the new state. Also, periods of temporary absence, such as summer visitation with an on-of-state custodial parent are not counted.

The rule of continuing and exclusive jurisdiction says that once one state has made a child custody order, that state will be the only one permitted to modify that order so long as the child or one of the parents continues to reside in that state. Once everyone moves away, the exclusivity is lost. And once the child acquires a new home state by living there for six months the original home state will not longer be able to modify its own custody order.

If you are the non-custodial parent and continue to reside in the state that made the custody order that gave you visitation rights, you want to keep the authority over child custody in your state. The parent who has to incur the costs of travel, lodging, car rental and meals for every court appearance is at a tremendous disadvantage. In addition the amount of time off work is greater than it is for you since you don’t need to take a full day off work just to travel to city where the courthouse is located. So long as jurisdiction remains with your state, you have a significant advantage.

If you are the custodial parent and have moved from the state that made the custody order to another state, this disadvantage can be large burden. The non-custodial parent can force you to incur the travel costs of returning to the original state to litigate disputes over custody and visitation. You may be forced to make repeated trips back to defend your right to be the custodial parent.

The original state can, however, decline to exercise jurisdiction on the ground that it is not the most convenient forum. You can ask the judge in the original state to issue an order declining jurisdiction. That then will allow the custodial parent to force all future litigation to take place where they live.