Child Relocation 2026 Comparisons

In Indiana, “legal custody” is the equivalent principle for parental responsibility. Indiana Code, Section 31-9-2-67 defines “joint legal custody” as parents sharing authority and responsibility for the major decisions concerning a child’s upbringing, including a child’s education, healthcare, and religious upbringing. If one party has the authority and responsibility for these decisions, that party has “sole legal custody”. These principles apply in wedlock and out-of-wedlock situations and are embodied in Indiana Code, Sections 31-14-13-1 (out-of-wedlock), 31-14-13-2.3 (out-of-wedlock), 31-17-2-13 (wedlock), 31-17-2-14 (wedlock), and 31-17-2-15 (wedlock).

A birth mother may indicate a preference for “joint legal custody” on an Indiana paternity affidavit. If a birth mother does not make this indication on an Indiana paternity affidavit, she is presumed to have legal custody subject to an action being filed by a father, in wedlock or out-of-wedlock, to seek sole legal custody or joint legal custody.

In wedlock, a father may seek joint legal custody in a legal separation or divorce action, and is similarly situated to a mother. Out-of-wedlock, a father must seek to establish paternity, and meets his burden for joint legal custody if not established in a paternity affidavit.

A non-genetic parent, if established as an adoptive parent, has the same requirements as a genetic parent. Establishment as an adoptive parent must be by court order.

The distinctions are covered in the previous sections.

As long as the same requirements covered in the prior sections are present, same-sex relationships are treated equally.

The requirements are the same as long as the adoptive parents are established by court order.

Indiana has a relocation statute, Indiana Code, Section 31-17-2.2-1 et seq, originally adopted in 2006 and substantially amended in 2019, that provides notice requirements and opportunity to object to a child’s relocation. The lack of objection or filing by a non-relocating parent or court approval of an agreement of the parents to relocation allows for a relocation of a child. The non-relocating parent is the party who must provide consent.

Under Indiana Code, Section 31-17-2.2-1 et seq, with reference to Indiana custody statutes, an Indiana trial court of competent jurisdiction resolves the relocation issue.

Under Indiana Code, Section 31-17-2.2-1(b), a relocating parent is not required to file a notice of intent to relocate or have the approval of the non-relocating parent if, in addition to allowing a child to remain enrolled in a child’s current school:

• the relocation has been addressed by a prior court order, including a court order relieving the relocating parent of the requirement to file a notice; or
• the relocation will:
1. result in the distance between the relocating parent’s residence and the non-relocating parent’s residence; or
2. result in an increase of not more than 20 miles between the relocating parent’s residence and the non-relocating parent’s residence.

It is non-compliant with the Indiana relocation statute and Indiana Trial Rule 65, and may be in conflict with Indiana county local rules to relocate a child without obtaining the proper voluntary consent or court-ordered approval to relocate.

A non-relocating parent may file actions in the appropriate Indiana trial court to seek the return of a child or pursue actions in a federal district court or Indiana trial court to seek the return of a child under the 1980 Hague Convention. It generally is easier to compel a return from a signatory country than a non-signatory country.

The United States is a signatory to the 1980 Hague Convention. The United States Central Authority is active and maintains a list of attorneys who may be willing to provide free legal advice to a parent of an abducted child. While finding an attorney who will accept a representation and provide legal advice, the United States Central Authority is active. The United States Central Authority does not routinely provide state-by-state data, but information may be available upon request. The United States rigorously applies the underlying principle of the 1980 Hague Convention regarding the immediate return of an abducted child if the standards are met. The United States is more circumspect in returning an abducted child to a non-Convention country but generally applies the same Convention standard. For applications under the 1980 Hague Convention, the process can take anywhere between 3–12 months on average and costs can be substantial with discovery and trial implicated. The time and cost are case dependent and can vary dramatically.

This is not applicable as the United States is a signatory to the 1980 Hague Convention.