Removing Your Child From NJ Permanently

What happens if your ex wants to move your child to another state and you do not consent?

Or what if you marry a dentist from Iowa who can't practically relocate his dental practice to NJ and therefore you need to move to Iowa but your ex will not allow your children to go with you?

Do your kids go?

Or do they stay in New Jersey?

Our NJ statutes have made it clear for decades that usually either the other spouse's consent or an order of a NJ Superior Court Judge is required before such a permanent move can be allowed to occur.

N.J.S.A. 9:2-2 is the statute that governs this situation.

It indicates that the children shall not be removed out of NJ without the consent of both parents, unless the Court  shall otherwise order.

So in either situation, a Court order is required (if you go without a court order, you may be guilty of parental kidnapping, a crime...don't do that.)

Since 1988, the NJ Courts have been making it easier for custodial parents to make such a move.

Since 2001, the law in New Jersey was that a custodial parent could relocate to another state with a child so long as the move to the other state was being made in good faith and, to use the language of the New Jersey Supreme Court, "...was not inimical to the child's best interests." ("Inimical" means "against.")

So the law for the first 16 years of this century had been that as long as the primary custodian wanted to move to another state "in good faith" and the move was not "against the child's best interest," then the parent in New Jersey who was yelling and screaming not to allow this to happen was very often out of luck.

Then in 2017 the New Jersey Supreme Court rewrote the law on what is required when one parent wants to move children from the state of New Jersey on a permanent basis without the other parent's consent.

The Supreme Court reset the standard as "the best interest of the children."

Frankly, I had always wondered why that had not been the standard all along.

Indeed, when I was in law school in the early 1980's, I learned in my family law classes that "the best interest of the child" was the standard for most decisions affecting children in family court.

However, from 2001 to 2017, the law of the State of New Jersey was that if the parent moving wishing to move with the child to a different state was happy and secure, that this would somehow flow down to the child, and thus the child would be happy and secure also.

In 2017 the Supreme Court ruled that this prior decision (also of the NJ Supreme Court) was erroneous. 

And so the test is: "is it in the best interest of the child to allow the removal to the other state?"

If a Superior Court judge concludes that it is, then the kids go.

If that judge instead concludes that it is not, then the kids stay in NJ.

It's that simple.

A trial is usually required to allow the judge to determine "yes" or "no".

I hope that this article has been helpful to you.