Child Evidence

A small, methodologically limited body of research suggests that post- · Child Evidence

custody / parental relocation & child outcomes

A small, methodologically limited body of research suggests that post-separation relocation that increases a child's distance from a parent is, on average, associated with somewhat worse adjustment; the evidence is thin, largely retrospective or cross-sectional, confounded by conflict and selection, and the field's own experts conclude it supports no presumption either for or against relocation.

For the Court

Contested. A thin, confounded literature suggests relocation that increases distance from a parent is associated with somewhat worse adjustment on average, but the field agrees the evidence supports no presumption for or against relocation.

What This Claim Does NOT Say

Does not claim that relocation causes worse outcomes; the evidence is largely retrospective/cross-sectional and confounded by conflict, the reason for the move, and selection.
Does not support a legal presumption for or against relocation — the leading researchers and the custody-evaluation literature reject such presumptions (Austin, 2007).
Does not claim the effect is uniform: outcomes depend on travel distance, the quality of the child's relationship with each parent, and whether the move enhances the custodial household, and some outcomes are unaffected or improved (Poortman, 2021).
Does not establish that a particular child will be harmed (or helped) by a particular move; relocation disputes require an individualized best-interests inquiry, not extrapolation from group averages.

Scope — Where It Holds

Rests on a handful of studies built largely around one research program (Braver, Ellman & Fabricius, 2003; Stevenson, Fabricius et al., 2018) plus a scoping review finding only about 17 empirical studies across roughly 10 independent samples (Kostense, 2024). Associations are modest and inconsistent, vary by outcome and travel distance (Poortman, 2021), and are confounded by interparental conflict, the reason for the move, and who moves. Forensic-evaluation syntheses treat residential mobility as a general risk factor but expressly reject any presumption against relocation (Austin, 2007).

Sources & Verification

Seminal

Braver, S. L., Ellman, I. M., & Fabricius, W. V (2003). Relocation of children after divorce and children's best interests: new evidence and legal considerations. Journal of Family Psychology.
Cross-sectional
First direct evidence on move-aways: on most child outcomes, students whose parents had moved apart were significantly disadvantaged, suggesting courts should give weight to the child's separate interest in maintaining both parental relationships.
Bearing on this claim: First direct evidence on move-aways: students whose parents moved apart were disadvantaged on most outcomes.
doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.313759

Supporting

Stevenson, M. M., Fabricius, W. V., et al (2018). Associations between parental relocation following separation in childhood and maladjustment in adolescence and young adulthood. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law.

Precedent Bridge

Adopts a burden-shifting relocation framework and the Tropea best-interests factors; consistent with the research consensus that relocation is decided by individualized best-interests analysis, not a presumption for or against the move.246 Conn. 413 (1998)

Limits & Counter-considerations

The evidence base is small and dominated by one research program; most designs are retrospective or cross-sectional; samples are often unrepresentative (e.g., college students); and the central confounds — interparental conflict, the reason for the move, parental gatekeeping, and who relocates — are difficult to disentangle. Effects vary by outcome and distance and may be short-term.

Full Dossier

Last reviewed June 28, 2026