Washington
Child Custody Law

Washington Child Custody Guide :: Table of Contents

What Is Child Custody?
Child Custody Factors Table
Washington Child Custody Law Summary
How Child Custody Is Decided In Washington
Washington 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 Washington 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 Washington court system, and what factors are used to determine which parent gets custody.

Washington 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

Washington Child Custody Law Summary

After a breakup or divorce in Washington, 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 Washington in child custody cases include the child's wishes, willingness of the parent to cooperate with their partner and any history of domestic violence.

How does Custody Work, and What Factors are Considered in a Custody Proceeding?

The child's residential schedule shall be consistent.

The court will consider the following factors in determining custody:

The child's relationship with each parent

The consenting agreements of the parties involved

Each parent's overall defined parenting functions

whether a parent has taken greater responsibility in parenting than the other

The overall needs of the child

The child's relationship with siblings and other adults, including the child's involvement with their physical surroundings, school, and other activities

The wishes of the parents and the wishes of the child (if sufficiently mature to come to a reasoned preference)

Each parent's employment schedule, making accommodations corresponding to those schedules.

In cases where the court has made a finding of domestic violence or child abuse, the court may not require a victim of domestic violence or the custodial parent of a victim of child abuse to disclose to the other party information that would reasonably be expected to enable the perpetrator of domestic violence or child abuse to obtain previously undisclosed information regarding the name, location, or address of a victim's residence, employer, or school at an initial hearing,

In cases where domestic violence or child abuse has been alleged but the court has not yet made a finding, the court will provide the party alleging domestic violence or child abuse with the opportunity to prove the abuse with evidence before ordering the disclosure of information that would reasonably be expected to enable the alleged perpetrator of abuse to obtain any previously undisclosed information regarding name, location, address, employer, or school.

The court will carefully weigh the safety interests of the victim before issuing orders which would require disclosure in a future hearing if abuse is involved.

Washington Child Custody Factors - How Is Child Custody Decided In Washington?

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 Washington judge, who will attempt to make a custody decision that is in the "best interests of the child".

In the state of Washington, a number of factors are taken into account by the courts when determining who gets child custody. This section describes Washington'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 state of Washington?

Washington 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 state of Washington favor joint custody?

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

Courts in Washington 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 Washington courts encourage parents to cooperate together to raise the child?

Washington 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. Washington 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 state of Washington?

In Washington, 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 Washington courts consider domestic violence when determining custody?

Washington 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 state of Washington have the right to hire an attorney or Guardian Ad Litem to represent the child?

Washington 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):
WASH. REV. CODE § 26.09.013 WASH. REV. CODE § 26.09.187 WASH. REV. CODE § 26.09.220

RCW 26.09.013

Interpretive services—Literacy assistance—Guardian ad litem charges—Telephone or interactive videoconference participation—Residential time in cases involving domestic violence or child abuse—Disclosure of information—Supervised visitation and safe exchange centers.

In order to provide judicial officers with better information and to facilitate decision making which allows for the protection of children from physical, mental, or emotional harm and in order to facilitate consistent healthy contact between both parents and their children:

(1) Parties and witnesses who require the assistance of interpreters shall be provided access to qualified interpreters pursuant to chapter 2.42 or 2.43 RCW. To the extent practicable and within available resources, interpreters shall also be made available at dissolution-related proceedings.

(2) Parties and witnesses who require literacy assistance shall be referred to the multipurpose service centers established in *chapter 28B.04 RCW.

(3) In matters involving guardians ad litem, the court shall specify the hourly rate the guardian ad litem may charge for his or her services, and shall specify the maximum amount the guardian ad litem may charge without additional review. Counties may, and to the extent state funding is provided therefor counties shall, provide indigent parties with guardian ad litem services at a reduced or waived fee.

(4) Parties may request to participate by telephone or interactive videoconference. The court may allow telephonic or interactive videoconference participation of one or more parties at any proceeding in its discretion. The court may also allow telephonic or interactive videoconference participation of witnesses.

(5) In cases involving domestic violence or child abuse, if residential time is ordered, the court may:

(a) Order exchange of a child to occur in a protected setting;

(b) Order residential time supervised by a neutral and independent adult and pursuant to an adequate plan for supervision of such residential time. The court shall not approve of a supervisor for contact between the child and the parent unless the supervisor is willing to and capable of protecting the child from harm. The court shall revoke court approval of the supervisor if the court determines, after a hearing, that the supervisor has failed to protect the child or is no longer willing or capable of protecting the child. If the court allows a family or household member to supervise residential time, the court shall establish conditions to be followed during residential time.

(6)(a) In cases in which the court has made a finding of domestic violence or child abuse, the court may not require a victim of domestic violence or the custodial parent of a victim of child abuse to disclose to the other party information that would reasonably be expected to enable the perpetrator of domestic violence or child abuse to obtain previously undisclosed information regarding the name, location, or address of a victim's residence, employer, or school at an initial hearing, and shall carefully weigh the safety interests of the victim before issuing orders which would require disclosure in a future hearing.

(b) In cases in which domestic violence or child abuse has been alleged but the court has not yet made a finding regarding such allegations, the court shall provide the party alleging domestic violence or child abuse with the opportunity to prove the allegations before ordering the disclosure of information that would reasonably be expected to enable the alleged perpetrator of domestic violence or child abuse to obtain previously undisclosed information regarding the name, location, or address of a victim's residence, employer, or school.

(7) In cases in which the court finds that the parties do not have a satisfactory history of cooperation or there is a high level of parental conflict, the court may order the parties to use supervised visitation and safe exchange centers or alternative safe locations to facilitate the exercise of residential time.

RCW 26.09.187

Criteria for establishing permanent parenting plan.

(1) DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROCESS. The court shall not order a dispute resolution process, except court action, when it finds that any limiting factor under RCW 26.09.191 applies, or when it finds that either parent is unable to afford the cost of the proposed dispute resolution process. If a dispute resolution process is not precluded or limited, then in designating such a process the court shall consider all relevant factors, including:

(a) Differences between the parents that would substantially inhibit their effective participation in any designated process;

(b) The parents' wishes or agreements and, if the parents have entered into agreements, whether the agreements were made knowingly and voluntarily; and

(c) Differences in the parents' financial circumstances that may affect their ability to participate fully in a given dispute resolution process.

(2) ALLOCATION OF DECISION-MAKING AUTHORITY.

(a) AGREEMENTS BETWEEN THE PARTIES. The court shall approve agreements of the parties allocating decision-making authority, or specifying rules in the areas listed in RCW 26.09.184(5)(a), when it finds that:

(i) The agreement is consistent with any limitations on a parent's decision-making authority mandated by RCW 26.09.191; and

(ii) The agreement is knowing and voluntary.

(b) SOLE DECISION-MAKING AUTHORITY. The court shall order sole decision-making to one parent when it finds that:

(i) A limitation on the other parent's decision-making authority is mandated by RCW 26.09.191;

(ii) Both parents are opposed to mutual decision making;

(iii) One parent is opposed to mutual decision making, and such opposition is reasonable based on the criteria in (c) of this subsection.

(c) MUTUAL DECISION-MAKING AUTHORITY. Except as provided in (a) and (b) of this subsection, the court shall consider the following criteria in allocating decision-making authority:

(i) The existence of a limitation under RCW 26.09.191;

(ii) The history of participation of each parent in decision making in each of the areas in RCW 26.09.184(5)(a);

(iii) Whether the parents have a demonstrated ability and desire to cooperate with one another in decision making in each of the areas in RCW 26.09.184(5)(a); and

(iv) The parents' geographic proximity to one another, to the extent that it affects their ability to make timely mutual decisions.

(3) RESIDENTIAL PROVISIONS.

(a) The court shall make residential provisions for each child which encourage each parent to maintain a loving, stable, and nurturing relationship with the child, consistent with the child's developmental level and the family's social and economic circumstances. The child's residential schedule shall be consistent with RCW 26.09.191. Where the limitations of RCW 26.09.191 are not dispositive of the child's residential schedule, the court shall consider the following factors:

(i) The relative strength, nature, and stability of the child's relationship with each parent;

(ii) The agreements of the parties, provided they were entered into knowingly and voluntarily;

(iii) Each parent's past and potential for future performance of parenting functions as defined in *RCW 26.09.004(3), including whether a parent has taken greater responsibility for performing parenting functions relating to the daily needs of the child;

(iv) The emotional needs and developmental level of the child;

(v) The child's relationship with siblings and with other significant adults, as well as the child's involvement with his or her physical surroundings, school, or other significant activities;

(vi) The wishes of the parents and the wishes of a child who is sufficiently mature to express reasoned and independent preferences as to his or her residential schedule; and

(vii) Each parent's employment schedule, and shall make accommodations consistent with those schedules.

Factor (i) shall be given the greatest weight.

(b) Where the limitations of RCW 26.09.191 are not dispositive, the court may order that a child frequently alternate his or her residence between the households of the parents for brief and substantially equal intervals of time if such provision is in the best interests of the child. In determining whether such an arrangement is in the best interests of the child, the court may consider the parties geographic proximity to the extent necessary to ensure the ability to share performance of the parenting functions.

(c) For any child, residential provisions may contain any reasonable terms or conditions that facilitate the orderly and meaningful exercise of residential time by a parent, including but not limited to requirements of reasonable notice when residential time will not occur.

RCW 26.09.220

Parenting arrangements—Investigation and report—Appointment of guardian ad litem.

(1)(a) The court may order an investigation and report concerning parenting arrangements for the child, or may appoint a guardian ad litem pursuant to RCW 26.12.175, or both. The investigation and report may be made by the guardian ad litem, court-appointed special advocate, the staff of the juvenile court, or other professional social service organization experienced in counseling children and families.

(b) An investigator is a person appointed as an investigator under RCW 26.12.050(1)(b) or any other third-party professional ordered or appointed by the court to provide an opinion, assessment, or evaluation regarding the creation or modification of a parenting plan.

(2) In preparing the report concerning a child, the investigator or person appointed under subsection (1) of this section may consult any person who may have information about the child and the potential parenting or custodian arrangements. Upon order of the court, the investigator or person appointed under subsection (1) of this section may refer the child to professional personnel for diagnosis. The investigator or person appointed under subsection (1) of this section may consult with and obtain information from medical, psychiatric, or other expert persons who have served the child in the past without obtaining the consent of the parent or the child's custodian; but the child's consent must be obtained if the child has reached the age of twelve, unless the court finds that the child lacks mental capacity to consent. If the requirements of subsection (3) of this section are fulfilled, the report by the investigator or person appointed under subsection (1) of this section may be received in evidence at the hearing.

(3) The investigator or person appointed under subsection (1) of this section shall provide his or her report to counsel and to any party not represented by counsel at least ten days prior to the hearing unless a shorter time is ordered by the court for good cause shown. The investigator or person appointed under subsection (1) of this section shall make available to counsel and to any party not represented by counsel his or her file of underlying data and reports, complete texts of diagnostic reports made to the investigator or appointed person pursuant to the provisions of subsection (2) of this section, and the names and addresses of all persons whom he or she has consulted. Any party to the proceeding may call the investigator or person appointed under subsection (1) of this section and any person whom the investigator or appointed person has consulted for cross-examination. A party may not waive the right of cross-examination prior to the hearing.