Explaining Gruber Factors in a Pennsylvania Family Law Case

If you want to relocate to another state or country with your children, you’ll need to first seek court permission. The court will analyze your case by applying a set of considerations outlined in the Pennsylvania Supreme Court case Gruber v. Gruber, 583 A.2d 434 (1990). This case sets forth the framework for courts to use when evaluating relocation requests. In other words, if you plan on relocating to another state or country with your children, you should familiarize yourself with the Gruber case.

The core principle behind the Gruber decision (which applies to relocations in general) is that the court’s primary focus should be on the best interests of the child when authorizing a parent to move out of state. If you’re looking to relocate, this standard will be applied to your case.

Understanding the Gruber case

The Gruber case determined four interests that judges should balance when deciding whether or not to allow a parent to relocate. Those are:

• The relocating parent’s wishes – This includes the parent’s desire to make major life choices that affect them and their children.

• The child’s interest in a strong relationship with the non-custodial parent – The court must consider whether or not the child will be able to maintain a relationship with the non-custodial parent after the move.

• The non-custodial parent’s interest in seeing their children – The non-custodial parent’s wishes must be considered when allowing the custodial parent to move with the children.

• The state’s duty to protect the child’s best interests – The court must ensure the decision to relocate prioritizes the child’s well-being over all other considerations.

What factors will the court consider?

In weighing these competing interests, the Gruber case outlined several factors for trial courts to consider when addressing the matter of parental relocation. These include:

• Potential advantages of moving – The courts are tasked with considering whether the move would improve the relocating parent’s and the children’s quality of life (financially, emotionally, or educationally).

• The motives of both parents – The court must examine why the relocating parent wants to move and why the non-relocating parent opposes the move. Ultimately, the court will assess the “integrity” of each parent’s motives. Generally speaking, moving to secure a better job opportunity is looked upon favorably. Moving to spite the other parent is not looked on favorably.

• Alternative arrangements for maintaining the child’s relationship with the non-custodial parent – The court must ensure that the non-custodial parent can still have a meaningful relationship with their children despite them living elsewhere. This could involve revising visitation schedules, virtual communication tools, or sharing transportation responsibilities.

The Gruber case provides a foundation for deciding whether or not a parent can relocate with their children. Ultimately, the court is attempting to determine whether the move is in the child’s best interests or not.

Talk to a Philadelphia, PA, Child Custody Lawyer Today

Are you looking to relocate with your children? It will help to have a Philadelphia family lawyer represent your interests in court. Call the Law Offices of Lauren H. Kane today to schedule an appointment and learn more about how we can help.

Source:

law.justia.com/cases/pennsylvania/supreme-court/1990/400-pa-super-174-1.html