District of Columbia
Child Custody Law

District of Columbia Child Custody Guide :: Table of Contents

What Is Child Custody?
Child Custody Factors Table
District of Columbia Child Custody Law Summary
How Child Custody Is Decided In District of Columbia
District of Columbia Child Custody Law Text

Child Custody General Information - What Is Child Custody?

Child custody is defined as the guardianship over a child, which covers both physical custody and legal custody. In a child custody dispute the court may award joint custody to both parents or sole custody to a single parent.

Child custody cases in District of Columbia can be either contested and resolved by court order, or noncontested and defined in a child custody agreement between the parents. A custody agreement or order will legally determine, at minimum, the following things:

Where the child lives (physical custody)
Who is involved in making parenting decisions (legal custody)
How the visitation schedule with non-custodial parents or relatives is arranged

This page describes how a contested child custody case is handled in the District of Columbia court system, and what factors are used to determine which parent gets custody.

District of Columbia Custody Court Considerations Table

Statutory Factors
Childs Wishes
Joint Custody Authorized
Favor Joint Custody
Cooperative Parent
Domestic Violence
Attorney or Guardian Ad Litem For Child

District of Columbia Child Custody Law Summary

After a breakup or divorce in District of Columbia, couples with children must come to a child custody agreement that describes which parent the children will live with, how visitation will be scheduled, and how the non-custodial parent will pay child support.

Some of the factors considered by District of Columbia in child custody cases include the child's wishes, willingness of the parent to cooperate with their partner and any history of domestic violence.

The parenting plan may include, but shall not be limited to, provisions for:

the residence of the child or children

the financial support based on the needs of the child and the actual resources of the parent

visitation

holidays, birthdays, and vacation visitation

transportation of the child between the residences

education

religious training, if any

access to the child’s educational, medical, psychiatric, and dental treatment records

communication between the child and the parents

the resolution of conflict, such as a recognized family counseling or mediation service

In making its custody determination, the Court:

shall consider the parenting plans submitted by the parents in evaluating the factors set forth in subsection (a)(3) of this section in fashioning a custody order

shall designate the parent(s) who will make the major decisions concerning the health, safety, and welfare of the child that need immediate attention

may order either or both parents to attend parenting classes.(e) Joint custody shall not eliminate the responsibility for child support in accordance with the applicable child support guideline as set forth in § 16-916.01.(f)(1) An award of custody may be modified or terminated upon the motion of one or both parents, or on the Court’s own motion, upon a determination that there has been a substantial and material change in circumstances and that the modification or termination is in the best interest of the child.(2) When a motion to modify custody is filed, the burden of proof is on the party seeking a change, and the standard of proof shall be by a preponderance of the evidence.(3) The provisions of this chapter shall apply to motions to modify or terminate any award of custody filed after April 18, 1996.(g) The Court, for good cause and upon its own motion, may appoint a guardian ad litem or an attorney, or both, to represent the minor child’s interests.(h) The Court shall enter an order for any custody arrangement that is agreed to by both parents unless clear and convincing evidence indicates that the arrangement is not in the best interest of the minor child.(i) An objection by one parent to any custody arrangement shall not be the sole basis for refusing the entry of an order that the Court determines is in the best interest of the minor child.(j) The Court shall place on the record the specific factors and findings which justify any custody arrangement not agreed to by both parents.(k) Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, no person shall be granted legal custody or physical custody of, or visitation with, a child if the person has been convicted of first degree sexual abuse, second degree sexual abuse, or child sexual abuse, and the child was conceived as a result of that violation.

District of Columbia Child Custody Factors - How Is Child Custody Decided In District of Columbia?

If the parents are on amicable terms they may agree to custody terms in a parenting agreement between themselves, or via a mediator. If child custody is disputed, however, they will have to receive a child custody order from a District of Columbia judge, who will attempt to make a custody decision that is in the "best interests of the child".

In the District of Columbia, a number of factors are taken into account by the courts when determining who gets child custody. This section describes District of Columbia's custody factors, considerations, and presumptions when evaluating a custody order.

Is there a set list of statutory factors for calculating child custody in the District of Columbia?

District of Columbia has a list of statutory factors that are considered by the court when determining a custody order. This list may include factors such as the child's age, the living situation of each parent, any history of abuse or neglect from either parent, etc. Although there is a statutory list of factors, consider other factors at its discretion depending on the particular circumstances of the case.

Do judges in the District of Columbia favor joint custody?

Judges in District of Columbia are authorized to order either joint or single-parent custody of a child subject to a custody dispute.

Courts in District of Columbia do not have a presumption in favor joint custody orders when evaluating child custody. The judge will evaluate the specifics of the custody dispute to determine what custody arrangement is in the best interests of the child.

Do District of Columbia courts encourage parents to cooperate together to raise the child?

District of Columbia courts favor awarding custody to a cooperative parent who is willing to work together with the other parent regarding child visitation, scheduling, child support, and other co-parenting matters. District of Columbia law favors co-parenting as being in the best interests of the child, and the courts will favor a parent willing to cooperate over a parent who attempts to alienate their child from the other parent.

Are the child's wishes considered when determining custody in the District of Columbia?

In District of Columbia, the court does consider the child's reasonable wishes when determining which parent wins custody. The judge may take the child's age, maturity, and judgement into consideration when considering the child's custody preference.

Do District of Columbia courts consider domestic violence when determining custody?

District of Columbia has laws that explicitly permit the consideration of domestic violence in conjunction with child custody. This may mean that domestic violence is a statutory factor in custody determinations, that the court has a presumption against custody for abusers, or that special procedural considerations are imposed in cases involving domestic violence.

Do the courts in the District of Columbia have the right to hire an attorney or Guardian Ad Litem to represent the child?

District of Columbia has statutory authority for appointment of a guardian ad litem or attorney specifically to represent the child in a custody case. This person advocates for the best interest of the child, and is tasked with investigating the family situation and advising the court what custody situation would be in the best interests of the child.

| State Law Official Text

Section(s):
D.C. CODE § 16-914

(a)(1)(A) In any proceeding between parents in which the custody of a child is raised as an issue, the best interest of the child shall be the primary consideration. The race, color, national origin, political affiliation, sex, sexual orientation, or gender identity or expression of a party, in and of itself, shall not be a conclusive consideration. The Court shall make a determination as to the legal custody and the physical custody of a child. A custody order may include:(i) sole legal custody;(ii) sole physical custody;(iii) joint legal custody;(iv) joint physical custody; or(v) any other custody arrangement the Court may determine is in the best interest of the child.(B) For the purposes of this paragraph, the term:(i) “Legal custody” means legal responsibility for a child. The term “legal custody” includes the right to make decisions regarding that child’s health, education, and general welfare, the right to access the child’s educational, medical, psychological, dental, or other records, and the right to speak with and obtain information regarding the child from school officials, health care providers, counselors, or other persons interacting with the child.(ii) “Physical custody” means a child’s living arrangements. The term “physical custody” includes a child’s residency or visitation schedule.(2) Unless the court determines that it is not in the best interest of the child, the court may issue an order that provides for frequent and continuing contact between each parent and the minor child or children and for the sharing of responsibilities of child-rearing and encouraging the love, affection, and contact between the minor child or children and the parents regardless of marital status. There shall be a rebuttable presumption that joint custody is in the best interest of the child or children, except in instances where a judicial officer has found by a preponderance of the evidence that an intrafamily offense as defined in § 16-1001(8), an instance of child abuse as defined in section 102 of the Prevention of Child Abuse and Neglect Act of 1977, effective September 23, 1977 (D.C. Law 2-22; D.C. Official Code § 4-1301.02), an instance of child neglect as defined in section 2 of the Child Abuse and Neglect Prevention Children’s Trust Fund Act of 1993, effective October 5, 1993 (D.C. Law 10-56; D.C. Official Code § 4-1341.01), or where parental kidnapping as defined in D.C. Official Code section 16-1021 through section 16-1026 has occurred. There shall be a rebuttable presumption that joint custody is not in the best interest of the child or children if a judicial officer finds by a preponderance of the evidence that an intrafamily offense as defined in § 16-1001(8), an instance of child abuse as defined in section 102 of the Prevention of Child Abuse and Neglect Act of 1977, effective September 23, 1977 (D.C. Law 2-22; D.C. Official Code § 4-1301.02), an instance of child neglect as defined in section 2 of the Child Abuse and Neglect Prevention Children’s Trust Fund Act of 1993, effective October 5, 1993 (D.C. Law 10-56; D.C. Official Code § 4-1341.01), or where parental kidnapping as defined in D.C. Official Code section 16-1021 through section 16-1026 has occurred.(3) In determining the care and custody of a child, the best interest of the child shall be the primary consideration. To determine the best interest of the child, the court shall consider all relevant factors, including, but not limited to:(A) the wishes of the child as to his or her custodian, where practicable;(B) the wishes of the child’s parent or parents as to the child’s custody;(C) the interaction and interrelationship of the child with his or her parent or parents, his or her siblings, and any other person who may emotionally or psychologically affect the child’s best interest;(D) the child’s adjustment to his or her home, school, and community;(E) the mental and physical health of all individuals involved;(F) evidence of an intrafamily offense as defined in section 16-1001(5) [now § 16-1001(8)];(G) the capacity of the parents to communicate and reach shared decisions affecting the child’s welfare;(H) the willingness of the parents to share custody;(I) the prior involvement of each parent in the child’s life;(J) the potential disruption of the child’s social and school life;(K) the geographic proximity of the parental homes as this relates to the practical considerations of the child’s residential schedule;(L) the demands of parental employment;(M) the age and number of children;(N) the sincerity of each parent’s request;(O) the parent’s ability to financially support a joint custody arrangement;(P) the impact on Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, or Program on Work, Employment, and Responsibilities, and medical assistance; and(Q) the benefit to the parents.(a-1) For the purposes of this section, if the judicial officer finds by a preponderance of evidence that a contestant for custody has committed an intrafamily offense, any determination that custody or visitation is to be granted to the abusive parent shall be supported by a written statement by the judicial officer specifying factors and findings which support that determination. In determining visitation arrangements, if the judicial officer finds that an intrafamily offense has occurred, the judicial officer shall only award visitation if the judicial officer finds that the child and custodial parent can be adequately protected from harm inflicted by the other party. The party found to have committed an intrafamily offense has the burden of proving that visitation will not endanger the child or significantly impair the child’s emotional development.(a-2) Repealed.(a-3)(1) A minor parent, or the parent, guardian, or other legal representative of a minor parent on the minor parent’s behalf, may initiate a custody proceeding under this chapter.(2) For the purposes of this subsection, the term “minor” means a person under 18 years of age.(b) Notice of a custody proceeding shall be given to the child’s parents, guardian, or other custodian. The court, upon a showing of good cause, may permit intervention by any interested party.(c) In any custody proceeding under this chapter, the Court may order each parent to submit a detailed parenting plan which shall delineate each parent’s position with respect to the scheduling and allocation of rights and responsibilities that will best serve the interest of the minor child or children. The parenting plan may include, but shall not be limited to, provisions for:(1) the residence of the child or children;(2) the financial support based on the needs of the child and the actual resources of the parent;(3) visitation;(4) holidays, birthdays, and vacation visitation;(5) transportation of the child between the residences;(6) education;(7) religious training, if any;(8) access to the child’s educational, medical, psychiatric, and dental treatment records;(9) except in emergencies, the responsibility for medical, psychiatric, and dental treatment decisions;(10) communication between the child and the parents; and(11) the resolution of conflict, such as a recognized family counseling or mediation service, before application to the Court to resolve a conflict.(d) In making its custody determination, the Court:(1) shall consider the parenting plans submitted by the parents in evaluating the factors set forth in subsection (a)(3) of this section in fashioning a custody order;(2) shall designate the parent(s) who will make the major decisions concerning the health, safety, and welfare of the child that need immediate attention; and(3) may order either or both parents to attend parenting classes.(e) Joint custody shall not eliminate the responsibility for child support in accordance with the applicable child support guideline as set forth in § 16-916.01.(f)(1) An award of custody may be modified or terminated upon the motion of one or both parents, or on the Court’s own motion, upon a determination that there has been a substantial and material change in circumstances and that the modification or termination is in the best interest of the child.(2) When a motion to modify custody is filed, the burden of proof is on the party seeking a change, and the standard of proof shall be by a preponderance of the evidence.(3) The provisions of this chapter shall apply to motions to modify or terminate any award of custody filed after April 18, 1996.(g) The Court, for good cause and upon its own motion, may appoint a guardian ad litem or an attorney, or both, to represent the minor child’s interests.(h) The Court shall enter an order for any custody arrangement that is agreed to by both parents unless clear and convincing evidence indicates that the arrangement is not in the best interest of the minor child.(i) An objection by one parent to any custody arrangement shall not be the sole basis for refusing the entry of an order that the Court determines is in the best interest of the minor child.(j) The Court shall place on the record the specific factors and findings which justify any custody arrangement not agreed to by both parents.(k) Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, no person shall be granted legal custody or physical custody of, or visitation with, a child if the person has been convicted of first degree sexual abuse, second degree sexual abuse, or child sexual abuse, and the child was conceived as a result of that violation. Nothing in this subsection shall be construed as abrogating or limiting the responsibility of a person described herein to pay child support.