QUICK ANSWER
What do judges consider when a parent wants to relocate with a child in South Carolina?
A South Carolina family court decides a relocation on one question: is the move in this child’s best interests? Since Latimer v. Farmer, 360 S.C. 375 (2004), neither parent starts ahead.
- No presumption for or against the move. Latimer overruled the old presumption against relocation.
- A move alone does not reopen custody. “Relocation of a custodial parent alone is not enough to constitute a substantial change in circumstances.” Sellers v. Nicholls, 432 S.C. 101, 118 (Ct. App. 2020). The parent asking for a change still has to prove a substantial change affecting the child and that the change is in the child’s best interests.
- Judges look at concrete things: why each parent wants or opposes the move, the child’s relationship with each parent, what the child actually gains, and whether a long distance schedule can realistically work.
- Equal time makes it harder. A move away from joint physical custody is inherently a change to primary physical custody. Sellers v. Nicholls, 432 S.C. 101 (Ct. App. 2020).
A move you can see coming, from either side of it
Maybe you have an offer letter on the kitchen counter. A better job in Atlanta, or orders to Virginia, or a chance to be near your own parents after years of doing this alone. You want to take it, and you are afraid that asking will cost you your children.
Or maybe you are the one who just heard about it. A text, a comment at pickup, a school enrollment form you were not supposed to see. Your child may be moving three states away, and the custody order you have lived under for years suddenly feels like it was written for somebody else’s life.
Both of those people are reading this page. The law does not favor either of you, and that is the first thing worth understanding. The second is that relocation cases are won or lost on specifics, which means what you do before anyone files matters a great deal.
Does South Carolina still presume against moving a child away?
No. It did for years, and a lot of what you will read online still says so. That rule ended in 2004.
In Latimer v. Farmer, 360 S.C. 375 (2004), the South Carolina Supreme Court overruled McAlister v. Patterson, 278 S.C. 481, to the extent it created a presumption against relocation. The Court held that “the controlling considerations are the child’s welfare and best interests,” and that “the effect of relocation on the child’s best interest is highly fact specific.”
Latimer decided something else that matters just as much. A move, by itself, is not a substantial change in circumstances. The Court declined “to hold relocation in itself is a substantial change in circumstance affecting the welfare of a child.” The Court of Appeals said the same in Walrath v. Pope, 384 S.C. 101, 105-06, 681 S.E.2d 602, 605 (Ct. App. 2009): “A change in the custodial parent’s residence is not in itself a substantial change in circumstances affecting the welfare of the children that justifies a change in custody.”
So if there is already a custody order, the parent asking to change it has to prove two things: a substantial change in circumstances affecting the child, and that changing custody is in the child’s best interests. A relocation can be part of that. It does not prove it alone.
What changes when you already share time equally?
A great deal. If you and the other parent split time roughly evenly, a move away does not tweak that schedule. It ends it.
The Court of Appeals put it plainly in Sellers v. Nicholls, 432 S.C. 101 (Ct. App. 2020): “Relocation from joint physical custody is inherently a change to primary physical custody.” When one parent moves away from a fifty fifty arrangement, the court is deciding which home the child will live in most of the time.
In Sellers, the mother moved from Greenville to Columbia for a promotion. The court found the promotion never materialized, and primary physical custody went to the father. The Court of Appeals affirmed.
If you share time equally now, plan as though the question is “which parent,” because in practice that is what it becomes.
What will the judge actually look at?
South Carolina has no official relocation checklist. No statute sets one, and the Supreme Court has not adopted one. In Latimer, the Court described factors used in New York and Pennsylvania without endorsing them as a required test, and South Carolina courts have used them as guidance ever since, including in Walrath and in McComb v. Conard (Ct. App. 2011). In plain terms, the judge is asking:
- Why does each parent want the move, or oppose it? Latimer lists each parent’s reasons and “the integrity of the motives of both” parents. A real job, family support, or an educational opportunity carries weight. A move that looks like a whim, or an effort to cut the other parent out, does not.
- What is the child’s relationship with each parent? Who handles school, doctors, activities, and the everyday work of raising this child.
- How will the move affect time with the parent who stays? The more involved that parent is now, the more the move has to justify.
- What will the child actually gain? Latimer looks at whether the move enhances the parent’s and child’s lives “economically, emotionally, and educationally,” and whether it would “improve substantially the quality of life.”
- Can the relationship with the other parent realistically survive the distance? Latimer asks about “realistic substitute visitation arrangements.” Summers, holidays, travel, calls, and who pays for it.
The judge also works through the general best interest factors in S.C. Code Ann. § 63-15-240(B). Two matter here more than most. One is each parent’s actions to encourage the child’s relationship with the other parent. The other is whether a parent has relocated more than one hundred miles from the child’s primary residence in the past year.
The child’s own view counts too. Under S.C. Code Ann. § 63-15-30, the court considers a child’s reasonable preference, weighed by the child’s age, maturity, experience, judgment, and ability to express it. It is one factor. It is not a vote.
The numbers in the law
South Carolina has had no presumption against relocation since 2004. A move of more than one hundred miles in the past year is one of seventeen best interest factors a family court must consider, and it is not a disqualifier on its own.
Sources: Latimer v. Farmer, 360 S.C. 375 (2004); S.C. Code Ann. Section 63-15-240(B)(16), which excludes relocations made for safety reasons.
What tends to help a move, and what tends to sink one
These are patterns, not rules. Every case turns on its own facts, and judges weigh the same facts differently. In the reported South Carolina cases where a move was allowed, the parent usually had a specific improvement already secured and a real plan for keeping the child close to the other parent. General hopes for a better life rarely carry it.
Tends to support a move
- A job offer, transfer, or military orders, in writing
- Close family support at the new location, and little here
- Clearly better schools, activities, or care for the child, with specifics
- The moving parent has been the main day to day caregiver
- A detailed, generous long distance schedule, with a plan for travel costs
Tends to defeat a move
- The other parent is actively involved and would lose regular contact
- The child’s school, friends, and extended family are all here
- No evidence of why the move is needed or how it helps the child
- A visitation plan too thin or too expensive to work
- Signs the move is meant to shrink the other parent’s role
Four published decisions show how this plays out.
| Case | The move | What the court relied on | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Latimer v. Farmer (2004) | Father, Easley area to Michigan | A job offer that ended his work travel, family support nearby, an active role in the child’s care, and contact for the mother by phone, email, and video | Move allowed. Custody change denied. Affirmed. |
| McComb v. Conard (Ct. App. 2011) | Mother, Columbia to Florida | She could teach in Florida but not here, at higher pay, with family there. The court applied the Latimer factors even though no custody order existed yet | Move allowed. Affirmed. |
| Sellers v. Nicholls (Ct. App. 2020) | Mother, Greenville to Columbia, from joint custody | The promotion she moved for never materialized | Primary custody to the father. Affirmed. |
| Gandy v. Gandy (Ct. App. 2024) | Mother, Myrtle Beach to New Orleans, with four children, decided at the divorce | A $60,000 job with full benefits, a rent-free home behind her parents, who could help with the children daily, a son’s specialist five minutes away instead of two and a half hours, one school for all four children, and a schedule for the father with weekends, most school breaks and holidays, daily electronic contact, and shared travel costs | Move allowed. Affirmed. |
These show what courts have done on their facts, not what a court will do on yours.
Gandy shows how much a concrete plan can carry. The family court noted that every expert in the case thought the children would be better off staying in Horry County with both parents. It allowed the move anyway, because the mother had shown the Latimer factors favored it. The Court of Appeals affirmed and repeated that a court’s authority to prohibit an out-of-state move “should be exercised sparingly.” Gandy v. Gandy, 442 S.C. 340, 351-53, 898 S.E.2d 208, 214-15 (Ct. App. 2024). That cuts both ways. A parent who opposes a move needs more than a general sense that staying put is better.
Moving within South Carolina is a different rule
A move from Mount Pleasant to Greenville is not treated like a move to Georgia. Under S.C. Code Ann. § 63-3-530(A)(30), a family court may not enter an order prohibiting a custodial parent from moving within South Carolina unless there is a compelling reason or the parents agree. That does not make an in-state move consequence free. It sets a high bar for stopping one.
What should you do before you move with your child?
- Read your order before you do anything else. Many custody orders and agreements include notice requirements or limits on moving the child. A parent who willfully violates a family court order can be held in contempt under S.C. Code Ann. § 63-3-620.
- Do not move first and ask later. A change you created by ignoring a valid order is a poor foundation for a case. In Marks v. Marks, 281 S.C. 316 (Ct. App. 1984), a change flowing from a parent removing a child in violation of a decree was not enough to justify modification.
- Get the opportunity in writing. Offer letters, salary information, school details, and housing plans. Concrete beats hopeful.
- Build a real plan for the other parent. A specific long distance schedule that covers summers, holidays, and school breaks, and says who arranges travel and who pays for it.
- Try for an agreement. If the other parent consents, the agreement can go to the court for approval. Without consent, the question generally goes to the court.
How do you respond when the other parent plans to move?
- Act promptly. A move that has already happened becomes the new normal, and family court judges are reluctant to disturb a status quo. A court can enter temporary orders while a case is pending, and ex parte relief is available only to protect a child’s health, safety, or welfare or to avoid irreparable harm.
- Document your involvement. School pickups, medical visits, activities, and parenting time, dated. Your current role is central to the decision.
- Stay focused on the child. Courts respond to concrete evidence about the child’s life. Criticism of the other parent tends to land poorly, and one factor the court weighs is whether each parent supports the child’s relationship with the other.
- Get an honest assessment of what you are asking for. Changing custody and adjusting a schedule are different requests with different burdens. The move alone will not carry a custody change. What carries it is everything the move changes for your child.
For how relocation fits into a South Carolina custody case as a whole, start with our Charleston child custody page.
Questions parents ask about relocating with a child
Can I move out of state with my child if the other parent says no?
In South Carolina, if the other parent will not agree, the question generally goes to the family court.
South Carolina has no presumption for or against relocation. Under Latimer v. Farmer, 360 S.C. 375 (2004), a family court decides a contested move on the child’s best interests, weighing each parent’s reasons, the child’s relationship with each parent, the benefits of the move, and whether a realistic long distance schedule can preserve the relationship with the parent who stays. Many custody orders also contain their own notice requirements or limits on moving.
Is moving away a substantial change in circumstances for custody?
In South Carolina, not by itself.
Latimer v. Farmer, 360 S.C. 375 (2004), and Walrath v. Pope, 384 S.C. 101 (Ct. App. 2009), hold that a custodial parent’s relocation is not, in itself, a substantial change in circumstances affecting a child’s welfare. A parent seeking a custody change must prove a substantial change affecting the child and that the change of custody is in the child’s best interests. A move can be part of that showing when combined with its effects on the child.
What happens to 50/50 custody if one parent moves away?
In South Carolina, the court usually ends up deciding which parent has primary custody.
In Sellers v. Nicholls, 432 S.C. 101 (Ct. App. 2020), the South Carolina Court of Appeals stated that “relocation from joint physical custody is inherently a change to primary physical custody.” When one parent moves away from an equal time arrangement, a family court is deciding which parent the child will primarily live with, based on the child’s best interests.
Does my child get a say in whether we relocate?
In South Carolina, the child’s preference is considered, but it does not decide the case.
Under S.C. Code Ann. Section 63-15-30, a South Carolina family court considers a child’s reasonable preference for custody, giving it weight based on the child’s age, experience, maturity, judgment, and ability to express a preference. It is one consideration alongside the best interest factors in Section 63-15-240(B), and no statute sets an age at which a child chooses.
Key takeaways
- Nobody starts ahead. Latimer v. Farmer ended South Carolina’s presumption against relocation in 2004, and the child’s best interests control.
- A move alone does not change custody. The parent seeking a change still has to prove a substantial change affecting the child and that the change serves the child.
- Specifics carry these cases. A secured job, real family support, concrete benefits for the child, and a workable long distance schedule matter more than general hopes.
- Equal time raises the stakes. Moving away from joint physical custody turns the case into a decision about which parent has primary custody.
Before anyone packs a box
Whichever side of this you are on, the best time to get advice is before the move happens. Bring what you have: your current order, whatever you know about the move and the reasons for it, and an honest picture of who does what for your child today. The rest gets sorted from there.
Get clear on the move before it happens.
A relocation that happens first and gets argued later is harder to defend and harder to undo, for either parent. A conversation now about your order, your evidence, and a realistic schedule protects your time with your child while there are still choices to make. Conflicts are checked on that first call at no charge.
Confidential. Straight answers. Serving Charleston, Berkeley, and Dorchester counties.
