MONDAY, DECEMBER 2, 2019 | SERVING CHICAGO’S LEGAL COMMUNITY FOR 164 YEARS | CHICAGOLAWBULLETIN.COM VOLUME 165, NO. 233 With a child involved, relocation not as easy as calling moving van There was a time when a 50 miles away from the origi- reasonable parenting sched- couple married, purchased a nal home within Illinois if it is ule can be worked out. home, worked and raised not in those counties. This case expressed the their children all in the same When there is not an agree- standards that were followed town. People proudly ment relative to the child’s for more than 28 years. How- declared “born and raised” as relocation, the requesting ever, in 2016, the legislature a badge of honor when ques- parent must follow specific repealed Section 609 and tioned about their home- procedures in order to obtain replaced it with Section 609.2 town. the right and permission to (750 ILCS 5/609.2 (West Supp. Yet, times are changing and relocate the child to a new 2016)). Under the current it has become increasingly residence. Failure to do so Section 609.2, the court must MODERN common to hear “I was born may subject a child to being consider, again, the child’s FA M I LY in … but raised in … ” as we returned to the original best interest if a parent seeks are becoming more of a home. to “relocate” a child. Among global society with parents Prior to 2016, Section 609 KIMBERLY A. COOK the considerations are: accepting job offers around of the marriage and dissolu- 1) The circumstances and the world. While these new tion of marriage act allowed a reasons for the intended relo- and exciting opportunities court to grant a custodial par- KIMBERLY A. COOK is a cation; may seem as a no-brainer to ent permission to remove a 2) The reasons, if any, why partner at Schiller accept, doing so for many minor child from Illinois a parent is objecting to the DuCanto & Fleck LLP. families in Illinois requires when it is in the child’s best intended relocation; Kimberly’s family law more considerations than just interest. The parent seeking 3) The history and quality of practice is informed by an whether the new location has removal had the burden of each parent’s relationship intimate understanding of better weather, better restau- proving, by the preponder- with the child and specifically the needs, challenges, and rants and better traffic. ance of the evidence, that whether a parent has substan- family dynamics of her Relocation is commonly removal would be in the tially failed or refused to exer- referred to as the act of mov- child’s best interest. contemporaries. She can cise the parental respon- ing to a new place and estab- In applying Section 609, the be reached at sibilities allocated to him or lishing one’s home and busi- Illinois Supreme Court stated, k c o o k @ s d f l a w. c o m . her under the parenting plan ness. Illinois law regarding “[a] determination of the best or allocation judgment; relocating with a child is gov- interests of the child cannot parent and the child; (2) the 4) The educational oppor- erned by Section 5/609.2 of be reduced to a simple bright- custodial parent’s motives for tunities for the child at the the Illinois Marriage and Dis- line test, but rather must be seeking removal, to deter- existing location and at the solution of Marriage Act. made on a case-by-case basis, mine whether the proposed proposed new location; The section outlines when depending, to a great extent move is a ruse designed to 5) The presence or absence a parent seeking to move upon the circumstances of frustrate or defeat the non- of extended family at the with a child must seek court each case.” In re Marriage of custodial parent’s visitation; existing location and at the approval and when this Eckert, 119 Ill.2d 316, 326 (3) the noncustodial parent’s proposed new location; approval is not required. (1988). motives in resisting removal; 6) The anticipated impact Under Illinois law, a parent is The Eckertcourt identified (4) the effect removal will of the relocation of the child; relocating if (a) the move is certain factors that might aid have on the noncustodial par- 7) Whether the court will more than 25 miles from the the trial court in determining ent’s visitation rights, because be able to fashion a reason- child’s original home if it is in the best interests of the child, it is in the best interests of a able allocation of parental Cook, DuPage, McHenry, including (1) the likelihood child to have a healthy and responsibilities between all Kane, Lake or Will Counties or that the proposed move will close relationship with both parents if the relocation the new home is out of state; enhance the general quality parents as well as other family occurs; or (b) the move is more than of life for both the custodial members; and (5) whether a 8) The wishes of the child, Copyright © 2019 Law Bulletin Media. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission from Law Bulletin Media.taking into account the improved quality of life to the parenting arrangements and related to their child irrespec- child’s maturity and ability to parent seeking relocation the potential disruption tive of whether they reside express reasoned and inde- generally unhelpful and irrel- caused by relocation. For within the same city or not. pendent preferences as to evant if it does not have a those who are considering While all is not lost for par- relocation; bearing on the best interests relocation or have reached an ents seeking to relocate a 9) Possible arrangements of the child. See, In re Mar- agreement or obtained a child, a parent should be for the exercise of parental riage of Kavchak, 2018 court order relative to reloca- aware of the challenge he or responsibilities appropriate Ill.App. (2d) 170853. tion, ensuring that the ongo- she may face in the event to the parent’s resources and This would include any ing relationship and commu- there is no agreement relative circumstances and the devel- “trickle down benefits” to the nication between the child to relocation of the child. opmental level of the child; children as any benefit is spec- and the other parent is main- Additional considerations 10) Minimization of the ulative and places the focus tained is certainly much eas- to be made relative to reloca- impairment to a parent-child on the improved quality of life ier now more than ever with tion include child support relationship caused by a par- of the parent seeking reloca- the advances in technology. and child-related costs includ- ent’s relocation; and tion and not necessarily the With most preschoolers ing, but not limited to, con- 11) Any other relevant fac- child. See, In re P.D., 2017 being better equipped to han- sideration of travel costs asso- tors bearing on the child’s Ill.App. (2d) 170355 (“given dle mobile devices better ciated with transporting the interests. the new statutory directives, than most adults, the use of child between the child’s (750 ILCS 5/609.2(g) (West we find the reasoning of Eck- video conferencing applica- home and either parent’s res- Supp. 2016)). ert and Collingbourne and tions such as FaceTime, idence especially in situations Under the 2016 revisions, [p]rogeny, to the extent it Skype, WhatsApp and Google where both parents no longer the court must consider the requires weighing the likeli- Duo provides for real time reside within the same state enumerated 11 factors in hood that the move will interaction and communica- or even country. determining a child’s best enhance the custodial par- tion regardless of distance In considering relocation, interest relative to a reloca- ent’s quality of life, is unhelp- between a parent and child. the financial toll of effectuat- tion. However, parents ful in evaluating the trial Interactive games, message ing a parenting schedule is should be aware that the cur- court’s best interest determi- boards, email, text messaging not just for consideration by rent statute does not include nation in the case before us.”). and social media platforms the court, but a reality which the explicit factor of consider- In other words, accepting a also provide a framework for impacts both parents and ing the benefits of the new job opportunity or relo- interactions between parent children. So while we are intended move to the parent cating to be closer to one’s and child. Schools, medical becoming a global society, it is seeking relocation that was family may be a real benefit to providers and most extracur- important to note that the included in the Eckert deci- a parent, yet the court may ricular activities or organiza- “road to relocation” is not sion. have a differing opinion if tions also provide portals or necessarily a smooth one By doing so, the emphasis there is no direct correlation other online access to stu- because there are serious is placed on the child’s direct to the best interest of the dent records, grades, calen- considerations that the court best interest over those of the child. dars and other information so and a family must make, custodial parent, making any The court will also look at that parents have readily avail- which may cause detours or evidence demonstrating an the continuity and stability of able access to information delay, along the way. Copyright © 2019 Law Bulletin Media. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission from Law Bulletin Media.