RCW 26.09.520
385 words·~2 min read·
/wa/title-26/chapter-26-09/26-09-520·A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.
The person proposing to relocate with the child shall provide his or her reasons for the intended relocation. There is a rebuttable presumption that the intended relocation of the child will be permitted. A person entitled to object to the intended relocation of the child may rebut the presumption by demonstrating that the detrimental effect of the relocation outweighs the benefit of the change to the child and the relocating person, based upon the following factors. The factors listed in this section are not weighted. No inference is to be drawn from the order in which the following factors are listed:
(1)The relative strength, nature, quality, extent of involvement, and stability of the child's relationship with each parent, siblings, and other significant persons in the child's life;
(2)Prior agreements of the parties;
(3)Whether disrupting the contact between the child and the person seeking relocation would be more detrimental to the child than disrupting contact between the child and the person objecting to the relocation;
(4)Whether either parent or a person entitled to residential time with the child is subject to limitations under RCW 26.09.191 or 26.09.192 ;
(5)The reasons of each person for seeking or opposing the relocation and the good faith of each of the parties in requesting or opposing the relocation;
(6)The age, developmental stage, and needs of the child, and the likely impact the relocation or its prevention will have on the child's physical, educational, and emotional development, taking into consideration any special needs of the child;
(7)The quality of life, resources, and opportunities available to the child and to the relocating party in the current and proposed geographic locations;
(8)The availability of alternative arrangements to foster and continue the child's relationship with and access to the other parent;
(9)The alternatives to relocation and whether it is feasible and desirable for the other party to relocate also;
(10)The financial impact and logistics of the relocation or its prevention; and
(11)For a temporary order, the amount of time before a final decision can be made at trial.
[ 2025 c 166 s 7 ; 2019 c 79 s 3 ; 2000 c 21 s 14 .]
Notes:
Intent — Captions not law — 2000 c 21: See notes following RCW 26.09.405 .