Indiana
Indiana Child Custody Laws (2026): How Courts Decide, Best Interests, and Your Rights
Independently fact-checked against primary sources (last audited August 18, 2026). · Reviewed by the RecordingLaw editorial team. · Law checked current as of August 18, 2026. · 4 primary sources cited on this page. How we verify our legal content

Indiana courts decide child custody under the best interests of the child standard, with the state statute expressly declaring there is no presumption favoring either parent. Courts evaluate nine statutory factors to determine both legal custody and physical custody in each case.
How does Indiana decide child custody?
Indiana courts decide custody under the best interests of the child standard codified at IC 31-17-2-8. The statute specifically states that there is "no presumption favoring either parent." Custody is decided by an Indiana Circuit or Superior Court, and the court that enters the original order generally retains jurisdiction over later modifications. Which county hears the case is keyed to a parent's residence, not the child's: in a dissolution, IC 31-15-2-6 requires at least one party to have been a resident of Indiana (or stationed at a United States military installation in Indiana) for six months, and a resident of the county where the petition is filed for three months, immediately preceding the filing.
Judges evaluate nine specific factors listed in the statute, considering the totality of each family's circumstances. Because the standard is purely fact-based with no presumption in favor of either parent or of any particular arrangement, the quality and completeness of evidence each parent presents about their relationship with the child and their ability to meet the child's needs is critical.
Indiana also adopted the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA) at IC 31-21, which governs which state has jurisdiction when parents live in different states. The UCCJEA home-state rule means Indiana courts generally have jurisdiction only if the child has lived in Indiana for the six months before the proceedings.
Types of custody in Indiana
Indiana uses two components of custody, each of which can be sole or joint:

Legal custody is the authority to make significant decisions about the child's upbringing, including choices about education, health care, and religious instruction. When both parents share legal custody, major decisions require their agreement (or a court order resolving disputes).
Physical custody determines where the child primarily lives and the parenting-time schedule that applies. The non-custodial parent typically receives parenting time (formerly called visitation) under a schedule set by the court or agreed to by the parties.
Joint legal custody may be awarded when the court finds it is in the child's best interests, based on factors like the parents' ability to cooperate, communication history, and geographic proximity. Joint physical custody is similarly available but is not presumed; a shared parenting-time schedule must be shown to serve the child's needs.
Does Indiana presume joint or 50/50 custody?
No. Indiana statute IC 31-17-2-8 is explicit: there is "no presumption favoring either parent" when courts determine custody. There is equally no presumption of joint legal custody, equal physical custody, or any particular parenting-time percentage.
This places Indiana among the majority of states that decide custody purely on a best-interests, case-by-case basis, without the strong equal-time or joint-custody presumptions enacted in recent years by states such as Kentucky (2018), Arkansas (2021), and Florida (2023). Indiana courts can and do award joint custody arrangements, including equal parenting time, but only when the specific evidence supports that outcome as being in the child's best interests.
Indiana's gender-neutral approach also means neither the father nor the mother starts from an advantaged position. Courts weigh each parent's actual involvement, fitness, and relationship with the child rather than applying any parental-preference rule based on sex.
Parents in Indiana weighing a specific schedule can run it through the parenting-time calculator to see the resulting percentage and how it relates to child support.
The best interests factors Indiana courts weigh
IC 31-17-2-8 lists nine factors judges must consider:
- Age and sex of the child. The child's developmental stage and particular needs are relevant, though sex alone does not favor one parent.
- Wishes of the parents. What each parent is requesting and why they believe it serves the child.
- Wishes of the child. The court considers the child's preference, with greater weight given to children 14 and older who can articulate reasoned views.
- Interaction and interrelationship with parents, siblings, and others. The quality of the child's relationships within each household and with extended family.
- Adjustment to home, school, and community. Stability of environment and community ties matters, particularly if one parent proposes a significant change.
- Mental and physical health of all individuals involved. Serious health conditions that affect parenting capacity are relevant.
- Pattern of domestic or family violence by either parent. A history of violence in the home is a significant negative factor.
- Evidence that the child has been cared for by a de facto custodian. A person other than a parent who has been the child's primary caregiver may have standing in some cases.
- A designation in a power of attorney of the child's parent, or of a person found to be a de facto custodian of the child. This factor recognizes formal caregiving arrangements made outside a court proceeding.
Courts may also consider each parent's willingness to support the child's relationship with the other parent, which is an implicit best-interests consideration even though it appears as a separate relocation and modification factor in Indiana's broader family code.
Custody when the parents were never married
IC 31-17-2 is the dissolution chapter, so the nine-factor analysis above is the one Indiana courts use when married parents divorce. Custody of a child born outside marriage runs through a different article, IC 31-14, and it starts from a different place. Under IC 31-14-13-1, a biological mother of a child born out of wedlock has sole legal custody of the child, subject to the exceptions listed in that section, unless a statute or court order provides otherwise.
Establishing paternity is what changes that starting point. Paternity may be established only in an action under IC 31-14 or by a paternity affidavit executed under IC 16-37-2-2.1 (IC 31-14-2-1). The affidavit form carries a box the mother and the father may check to agree to share joint legal custody. If they do not check it, the mother has sole legal custody unless a court decides otherwise in an IC 31-14 proceeding. Even when the parents do agree to joint legal custody on the affidavit, the mother has primary physical custody unless a court determines otherwise, and the father's parenting time follows the Indiana Parenting Time Guidelines unless a court orders otherwise under IC 31-14-14.
Once custody is actually before a court in a paternity case, IC 31-14-13-2 applies the same best interests standard and states in the same terms that there is not a presumption favoring either parent. Its factor list is slightly shorter than the dissolution list: eight factors, without the power-of-attorney designation that appears as the ninth factor in IC 31-17-2-8.
Relocation: moving with your child in Indiana
Indiana's relocation statute is at IC 31-17-2.2. A parent wishing to relocate must file and serve the other parent with written notice at least 30 days before the intended move date, or within 14 days of learning of the relocation, whichever is sooner (IC 31-17-2.2-3). The notice must include the new address (or the most specific available address), the date the parent intends to move, a revised parenting-time proposal, and the reasons for the relocation.
Notice is not required at all if the relocation is already addressed by a prior court order, or if the move decreases the distance between the parents' residences, or increases that distance by no more than 20 miles while the child stays enrolled in the child's current school (IC 31-17-2.2-1(b)).

The non-relocating parent may file an objection with the court. IC 31-17-2.2-5 then sets a two-step burden that is often described backwards. First, the relocating individual has the burden of proof that the proposed relocation is made in good faith and for a legitimate reason (such as employment, family support, or educational opportunity). If the relocating individual meets that burden, the burden shifts to the non-relocating parent to show that the proposed relocation is not in the best interest of the child. The relocating parent is not required to prove the move is in the child's best interests. Whether you are the parent moving or the one objecting, get a free case evaluation from an Indiana family lawyer on your side of that two-step burden (attorney advertising).
If the relocating parent fails to show good faith and a legitimate reason, or the objecting parent carries the shifted burden of showing the move is not in the child's best interest, the court may deny permission to relocate. Alternatively, the court may allow the relocation but modify parenting time and the custody order to account for the new circumstances. A relocation can itself be a substantial change in circumstances that opens the door to modifying the existing custody order.
Changing a custody order in Indiana
To modify a custody order in Indiana, a parent must satisfy the standard at IC 31-17-2-21: there must be a substantial change in one or more of the statutory factors listed in IC 31-17-2-8, and the modification must be in the child's best interests.
Indiana does not impose a specific waiting period before a modification can be filed (unlike Illinois's two-year bar or Arizona's one-year bar), but courts are reluctant to revisit orders shortly after they were entered without meaningful change. The substantial-change threshold is designed to prevent repeated, disruptive litigation.
Common grounds for modification include a significant shift in a parent's work schedule or living situation, documented deterioration of a parent's health or conduct, a relocation, evidence of abuse or neglect, or a meaningful change in the child's needs or preferences as the child matures. Changes in Indiana child support are often intertwined with custody modifications; see our Indiana child support laws page for details. Estimate a revised payment with our Indiana child support calculator.
If you are facing a custody case in Indiana
Taking the right steps early in an Indiana custody proceeding can significantly influence the outcome:

Know the nine factors and build your case around them. Because Indiana's analysis centers on specific enumerated factors, framing your evidence around those factors (adjustment, relationships, health, history of violence, etc.) is far more persuasive than general arguments about parenting quality.
Document your involvement. Courts favor parents who have been consistently present and active. Keep records of school pickups and attendance, medical appointments, extracurricular activities, and day-to-day caregiving tasks. Emails, texts, calendars, and school or healthcare records all help establish your caretaking history.
Take the child's preferences seriously. At 14 and older, a child's stated preference receives meaningful weight in Indiana courts. Understand your child's views, and demonstrate that you are attentive to them without pressuring the child to take sides.
Consider mediation. Many Indiana courts encourage or require mediation in contested custody cases. Mediated agreements are often more flexible and child-tailored than court-ordered schedules, and they tend to produce less ongoing conflict between the parents.
Consult a licensed family-law attorney if the case is contested, if there is a history of domestic violence or abuse, if the other parent has proposed relocation, or if modification of an existing order is involved.
This article is general legal information, not legal advice. Child custody law varies by state and turns on the specific facts of each family. For advice about your situation, consult a licensed family-law attorney in Indiana.
Related pages:
More Indiana Laws
- Indiana Alimony Laws
- Indiana Child Support Laws
- Indiana Divorce Laws
- Indiana Emancipation Laws
- Indiana Restraining Order Laws
Frequently Asked Questions
How is child custody determined in Indiana?
Indiana courts apply the best interests of the child standard under IC 31-17-2-8 and evaluate nine enumerated factors, including the child's age and needs, each parent's wishes, the child's wishes (with more weight at 14+), relationships with parents and siblings, adjustment to home and school, mental and physical health of all parties, history of domestic violence, and any power-of-attorney designation naming the child's parent or a de facto custodian.
Does Indiana favor the mother in custody cases?
Not when a court is deciding custody. IC 31-17-2-8 expressly states there is no presumption favoring either parent, IC 31-14-13-2 says the same for paternity cases, and the old tender-years doctrine that gave mothers a default advantage with young children has been abolished. There is one statutory default, and it applies only before a court has ruled on a child born outside marriage: under IC 31-14-13-1 the biological mother has sole legal custody until paternity is established and custody is determined, or until the parents agree to joint legal custody on a paternity affidavit under IC 16-37-2-2.1.
Is Indiana a 50/50 custody state?
No. Indiana law contains no presumption of equal parenting time or joint custody. Judges decide parenting schedules case-by-case based on the nine statutory best-interests factors. Equal parenting time is possible, but only when the specific facts of the case support it as the arrangement most likely to serve the child.
At what age can a child choose which parent to live with in Indiana?
Indiana does not set a fixed age at which a child can decide. Under IC 31-17-2-8, the child's wishes are one of the nine factors the court considers, with explicitly greater weight given to children who are 14 or older and can articulate reasoned preferences. Even then, the court retains authority to decide what is in the child's best interests.
How do I change a custody order in Indiana?
To modify a custody order under IC 31-17-2-21, you must show a substantial change in one or more of the original statutory factors that were the basis of the current order, and that the proposed modification is in the child's best interests. Indiana has no mandatory waiting period before filing a modification, but courts will require meaningful changed circumstances.
Can a parent move away with the child in Indiana?
A parent wishing to relocate must give the other parent written notice at least 30 days before the move, or within 14 days of learning of it, whichever is sooner, under IC 31-17-2.2-3. Notice is not required if the move is already addressed by a court order, or if it decreases the distance between the parents or increases it by 20 miles or less while the child stays in the same school (IC 31-17-2.2-1(b)). If the non-relocating parent objects, IC 31-17-2.2-5 applies a two-step burden: the relocating parent must first prove the move is made in good faith and for a legitimate reason, and if that is shown, the burden shifts to the objecting parent to prove the move is not in the child's best interest. The court may deny relocation or allow it while adjusting the custody and parenting-time order.
What is the difference between legal and physical custody in Indiana?
Legal custody is the authority to make major decisions about the child's education, health care, and religious upbringing. Physical custody determines where the child primarily lives and the parenting-time schedule. Both can be sole (one parent) or joint (shared), and courts decide them separately based on the child's best interests.
Updates
Corrected the Indiana relocation burden of proof (the relocating parent proves good faith and a legitimate reason, then the burden shifts to the objecting parent on best interests), fixed the county-residence rule for filing, and added a section on custody when the parents were never married.
Corrected Indiana's child-relocation notice period, which was stated as an unconditional 90 days: current law (IC 31-17-2.2-3, effective 2019) requires 30 days' notice (or 14 days after learning of the move, whichever is sooner), and no notice at all for moves that shorten the distance between parents or add 20 miles or less while the child stays in the same school (IC 31-17-2.2-1(b)). Removed Oklahoma (2025) from a sentence listing states that enacted equal-time or joint-custody presumptions; Oklahoma's 2025 bill never passed the Senate and no such presumption exists in Oklahoma law.
Corrected Indiana's child-relocation notice period, which was stated as an unconditional 90 days: current law (IC 31-17-2.2-3, effective 2019) requires 30 days' notice (or 14 days after learning of the move, whichever is sooner), and no notice at all for moves that shorten the distance between parents or add 20 miles or less while the child stays in the same school (IC 31-17-2.2-1(b)).
Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources; governing law re-checked for recent changes
Removed a fabricated 'criminal conviction' factor 9 from the IC 31-17-2-8 best-interests list; the actual factor 9 concerns a power-of-attorney designation naming the child's parent or a de facto custodian, an unrelated provision.
Governing law re-checked for recent changes
Reviewed and approved by an editor
The Law Behind This Article
This article rests on the statutory provisions below, held in our own legal record and retrieved from the official source. Tap a section to read the operative text.
Indiana Code, TITLE 31. FAMILY LAW AND JUVENILE LAW
§ 31-17-2-8Custody orderIn forcecited in 2 of our articles
Sec. 8. The court shall determine custody and enter a custody order in accordance with the best interests of the child. In determining the best interests of the child, there is no presumption favoring either parent. The court shall consider all relevant factors, including the following: (1) The age and sex of the child. (2) The wishes of the child's parent or parents. (3) The wishes of the child, with more consideration given to the child's wishes if the child is at least fourteen (14) years of age. (4) The interaction and interrelationship of the child with: (A) the child's parent or parents; (B) the child's sibling; and (C) any other person who may significantly affect the child's best interests. (5) The child's adjustment to the child's: (A) home; (B) school; and (C) community. (6) The mental and physical health of all individuals involved. (7) Evidence of a pattern of domestic or family violence by either parent. (8) Evidence that the child has been cared for by a de facto custodian, and if the evidence is sufficient, the court shall consider the factors described in section 8.5(b) of this chapter.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-04 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at iga.in.gov
Cited in 248 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Applied through the modification statute, Williamson v. Williamson (2005) treated a deteriorated parent-child relationship under factor (4) as a substantial change. In Re: The Marriage of Ann (Sutton) Baker v. Milo Sutton (2014) gave a fifteen-year-old's preference more consideration under factor (3).
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Williamson v. Williamson (Indiana Court of Appeals 2005, 825 N.E.2d 33)✓A 17 year old's custody moved from father to mother after their relationship deteriorated. The Indiana Court of Appeals applied the section 31-17-2-8 factors and affirmed, noting his wishes alone could not support the change but the worsened father son bond did.
- In Re: The Marriage of Ann (Sutton) Baker v. Milo Sutton (Indiana Court of Appeals 2014, 16 N.E.3d 481)✓A 15 year old told the judge in camera he wanted to live with his father, whose interests he had come to share. The Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed the switch, holding section 31-17-2-8 (3) gives more weight to the wishes of a child at least 14, reinforced by other factors.
- In Re: The Marriage of: Caleb E. Campbell v. Anna P. Campbell (Indiana Court of Appeals 2013, 993 N.E.2d 205)✓A father contested sole custody of his 11 year old biological son, whom the mother had adopted, going to her. The Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed, noting the trial court worked through each section 31-17-2-8 best interest factor on conflicting evidence it would not reweigh.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Indiana Name Change Laws: How to Legally Change Your Name
§ 31-17-2-21Modification of child custody orderIn force
Sec. 21. (a) The court may not modify a child custody order unless: (1) the modification is in the best interests of the child; and (2) there is a substantial change in one (1) or more of the factors that the court may consider under section 8 and, if applicable, section 8.5 of this chapter. (b) In making its determination, the court shall consider the factors listed under section 8 of this chapter. (c) The court shall not hear evidence on a matter occurring before the last custody proceeding between the parties unless the matter relates to a change in the factors relating to the best interests of the child as described by section 8 and, if applicable, section 8.5 of this chapter. [Pre-1997 Recodification Citation: 31-1-11.5-22(d), (e), (f).]
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at iga.in.gov
Cited in 120 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Williamson v. Williamson (Indiana Court of Appeals 2005, 825 N.E.2d 33)“…is a basis for reversal." Kirk, 770 N.E.2d at 307 . Ind.Code § 31-17-2-21(a) governs the modification of a child…”
- Dustin Lee Jarrell v. Billie Jo Jarrell (Indiana Court of Appeals 2014, 5 N.E.3d 1186)“…the initial custody determination.” Id. at 1255 (quoting I.C. § 31-17-2-21 (the Modification Statute)). If, howev…”
- Nienaber v. Marriage of Nienaber (Indiana Court of Appeals 2003, 787 N.E.2d 450)“…also that modifications in child custody are controlled by Ind.Code Ann. § 31-17-2-21 (West, PREMISE through 2002 Ist Special…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 31-17-2-13Joint legal custody; finding required for awardIn force
Sec. 13. The court may award legal custody of a child jointly if the court finds that an award of joint legal custody would be in the best interest of the child. [Pre-1997 Recodification Citation: 31-1-11.5-21(f) part.]
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at iga.in.gov
Cited in 15 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Reno v. Haler (Indiana Court of Appeals 2000, 734 N.E.2d 1095)“…as follows: “ ‘Joint legal custody’, for purposes of IC 31-17-2-13, IC 31-17-2-14, and IC 31-17-2-15, mean…”
- In re: The Marriage of: Caleb Hazelett v. Hailey Hazelett (Indiana Court of Appeals 2019, 119 N.E.3d 153)“…ng as joint custody is in the child’s best interest, Ind. Code § 31-17-2-13, and the court considers:…”
- Jennifer Lynn Goetz v. James Lawrence Franklin Goetz (Indiana Court of Appeals 2026)“…award “would be in the best interest of the child.” I.C. § 31-17-2-13. In determining whether an award of joi…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 31-17-2.2-1Notice of intent to move residence; modifying orders; attorney's fees; mediation and alternative dispute resolution; exceptionsIn force
Sec. 1. (a) Except as provided in subsection (b), a relocating individual must file a notice of the intent to move with the clerk of the court that: (1) issued the custody order or parenting time order; or (2) if subdivision (1) does not apply, has jurisdiction over the legal proceedings concerning the custody of or parenting time with a child. (b) A relocating individual is not required to file a notice of intent to move with the clerk of the court if: (1) the relocation has been addressed by a prior court order, including a court order relieving the relocating individual of the requirement to file a notice; or (2) the relocation will: (A) result in a decrease in the distance between the relocating individual's residence and the nonrelocating individual's residence; or (B) result in an increase of not more than twenty (20) miles in the distance between the relocating individual's residence and the nonrelocating individual's residence; and allow the child to remain enrolled in the child's current school.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at iga.in.gov
Cited in 82 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2025
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Dustin Lee Jarrell v. Billie Jo Jarrell (Indiana Court of Appeals 2014, 5 N.E.3d 1186)“…6) Other factors affecting the best interest of the child. Ind. Code § 31-17-2.2-1(b). A trial court may “award reasonable…”
- Ryan Gold v. Starr Weather (Indiana Court of Appeals 2014, 14 N.E.3d 836)“…50 N.E.2d 779, 784 (Ind. Ct. App. 2011), reh’g denied. See Ind. Code §§ 31-17-2.2-1, -5. Following a motion to prevent relo…”
- Paternity of J.J. ex rel. E.S. v. A. J. (Indiana Court of Appeals 2009, 911 N.E.2d 725)“…Other factors affecting the best interest of the child. Ind.Code § 31-17-2.2-1(b). "The court may consider a proposed…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 31-17-2.2-3Notice; information requirementsIn force
Sec. 3. Except as provided in section 4 of this chapter, an individual required to file a notice under section 1 of this chapter must: (1) file and serve the notice on each nonrelocating individual who is a party to the action in accordance with the Indiana Rules of Trial Procedure not later than thirty (30) days before the date of the intended relocation or not more than fourteen (14) days after the relocating individual becomes aware of the relocation, whichever is sooner; (2) send the notice to any nonrelocating individual who is not a party to the action by registered or certified mail not later than thirty (30) days before the date of the intended relocation or not more than fourteen (14) days after the relocating individual becomes aware of the relocation, whichever is sooner; and (3) provide the following information in the notice: (A) The intended new residence, including the: (i) address; and (ii) mailing address of the relocating individual, if the mailing address is different than the address under item (i). (B) All telephone numbers for the relocating individual. (C) The date that the relocating individual intends to move.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at iga.in.gov
Cited in 9 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2020
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- David v. Taylor v. Sheryl Crowder Taylor (Indiana Court of Appeals 2015, 42 N.E.3d 981)“…der, grandparent visitation order, or child support order.” I.C. § 31-17-2.2-3. And, “[u]pon motion of a party, the co…”
- Ryan Gold v. Starr Weather (Indiana Court of Appeals 2014, 14 N.E.3d 836)“…ove ninety days prior to the date she intended to relocate. Ind.Code § 31-17-2.2-3(a)(l)(B). Mother did not file her notic…”
- Geoffrey A. Gilbert v. Melinda J. Gilbert (Indiana Court of Appeals 2014, 7 N.E.3d 316)“…ation about the non-relocating parent’s ability to object. I.C. § 31-17-2.2-3(a)(2). If, within sixty days of…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 31-17-2.2-5Response to request for relocation; required information; burden of proof; exceptionsIn force
Sec. 5. (a) Except as provided in subsection (b), a nonrelocating parent shall file a response not more than twenty (20) days after the day the nonrelocating parent is served notice from the relocating individual under section 3 of this chapter. The nonrelocating parent's response must include one (1) of the following: (1) A statement that the nonrelocating parent does not: (A) object to the relocation of the child; and (B) request the modification of any custody, parenting time, grandparent visitation, or child support order. (2) The following: (A) A statement that the nonrelocating parent does not object to the relocation of the child. (B) A motion requesting the modification of a custody, parenting time, grandparent visitation, or child support order as a result of the relocation. (C) A request for a hearing on the motion filed under clause (B). (3) The following: (A) A statement that the nonrelocating parent objects to the relocation of the child.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at iga.in.gov
Cited in 78 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2025
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Swadner v. Swadner (Indiana Court of Appeals 2008, 897 N.E.2d 966)“…good faith and for a legitimate reason.” Id. (quoting I.C. § 31-17-2.2-5(c)). If this burden is met, then the no…”
- Dustin Lee Jarrell v. Billie Jo Jarrell (Indiana Court of Appeals 2014, 5 N.E.3d 1186)“…ation, or (2) by filing a motion to modify a custody order. I.C. §§ 31-17-2.2-5(a); -3(a)(2)(H). If the non-relocating…”
- Ryan Gold v. Starr Weather (Indiana Court of Appeals 2014, 14 N.E.3d 836)“…cation is made in good faith and for a legitimate reason.” I.C. § 31-17-2.2-5(c). If the court finds a good faith, le…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 31-14-13-1Sole legal custody in biological mother; exceptionsIn force
Sec. 1. A biological mother of a child born out of wedlock has sole legal custody of the child, except as provided in IC 16-37-2-2.1, and unless a statute or court order provides otherwise under the following: (1) IC 12-26 (involuntary commitment of a child). (2) IC 29-3 (guardianship and protective proceedings under the probate code). (3) IC 31-14 (custody of a child born outside of a marriage). (4) IC 31-34 (child in need of services). (5) IC 31-37 (delinquent child). (6) IC 35-46 (offenses against the family). (7) IC 35-50 (criminal sentences). (8) An order by a court that has jurisdiction over the child. [Pre-1997 Recodification Citation: 31-6-6.1-19.5.]
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at iga.in.gov
Cited in 9 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2025
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- In Re Paternity of Winkler (Indiana Court of Appeals 2000, 725 N.E.2d 124)“…en the governing statutes and the unique facts of the case. Ind.Code § 31-14-13-1 provides that "[a] biological mother of…”
- In Re Marriage of Huss (Indiana Supreme Court 2008, 888 N.E.2d 1238)“…child is deemed to be a child born out of wedlock, and that I.C. § 31-14-13-1 requires that "a biological mother is t…”
- Randles v. Indiana Patient's Compensation Fund (Indiana Court of Appeals 2007, 860 N.E.2d 1212)“…ean, the custodial parent, Se-andre, died. See Ind.Code § 31-14-13-1 (“A biological mother of a child born o…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 31-14-13-2Factors of custody determinationIn force
Sec. 2. The court shall determine custody in accordance with the best interests of the child. In determining the child's best interests, there is not a presumption favoring either parent. The court shall consider all relevant factors, including the following: (1) The age and sex of the child. (2) The wishes of the child's parents. (3) The wishes of the child, with more consideration given to the child's wishes if the child is at least fourteen (14) years of age. (4) The interaction and interrelationship of the child with: (A) the child's parents; (B) the child's siblings; and (C) any other person who may significantly affect the child's best interest. (5) The child's adjustment to home, school, and community. (6) The mental and physical health of all individuals involved. (7) Evidence of a pattern of domestic or family violence by either parent. (8) Evidence that the child has been cared for by a de facto custodian, and if the evidence is sufficient, the court shall consider the factors described in section 2.5(b) of this chapter. [Pre-1997 Recodification Citation: 31-6-6.1-11(a) part.]
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at iga.in.gov
Cited in 76 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Walker v. Nelson (Indiana Court of Appeals 2009, 911 N.E.2d 124)“…or more of the factors that the court may consider under [Ind.Code § 31-14-13-2]. . . ." Ind.Code § 31-14-13-6. [2] I…”
- In Re The Paternity of C.J.A.: G.C. (Mother) v. T.A. (Father) (Indiana Court of Appeals 2014, 3 N.E.3d 1020)“…ide this issue after considering all relevant factors under IC 31-14-13-2 and 31-17-2.2-1. 35. Both parties love…”
- Guardianship of L.R.T. and A.J.B. R.L. and P.L. (Guardians) v. A.B. and R.B. (Parents) (Indiana Court of Appeals 2012, 979 N.E.2d 688)“…ow the parent to seek employment, work, or attend school). Ind. Code § 31-14-13-2 .5(b). Pursuant to subsection (d), the…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 31-14-2-1Exclusive methods of establishing paternityIn force
Sec. 1. A man's paternity may only be established: (1) in an action under this article; or (2) by executing a paternity affidavit in accordance with IC 16-37-2-2.1. [Pre-1997 Recodification Citation: 31-6-6.1-9(b) part.]
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at iga.in.gov
Cited in 16 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2025
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Paternity of H.H. v. Hughes (Indiana Court of Appeals 2008, 879 N.E.2d 1175)“…ernity affidavit in accordance with Ind.Code § 16-37-2-2.1. Ind.Code § 31-14-2-1. Once a man executes a paternity affida…”
- In Re the Paternity of S.C. (Indiana Court of Appeals 2012, 966 N.E.2d 143)“…on of a paternity affidavit under I.C. § 16-37-2-2.1. See I.C. § 31-14-2-1; In re Paternity of D.L., 938 N.E.2…”
- Paternity of Davis v. Trensey (Indiana Court of Appeals 2007, 862 N.E.2d 308)“…t Davis based upon the results thereof. According to I.C. § 31-14-2-1 (West, PREMISE through 2006 Second Regu…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 31-15-2-6Residence; filing in county of guardian's residenceIn forcecited in 2 of our articles
Sec. 6. (a) At the time of the filing of a petition under section 4 of this chapter, at least one (1) of the parties must have been: (1) a resident of Indiana; or (2) stationed at a United States military installation within Indiana; for six (6) months immediately preceding the filing of the petition. (b) Except as provided in subsection (c), at the time of the filing of a petition under section 4 of this chapter, at least one (1) of the parties must have been: (1) a resident of the county; or (2) stationed at a United States military installation within the county; where the petition is filed for three (3) months immediately preceding the filing of the petition. (c) If a court has authorized a guardian to file a petition under section 4 of this chapter on behalf of an incapacitated person under IC 29-3-9-12.2, the guardian may file the petition for dissolution in the guardian's county of residence if the guardian has resided in that county for at least three (3) months immediately preceding the filing of the petition. [Pre-1997 Recodification Citation: 31-1-11.5-6(a) part, (b) part.]
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at iga.in.gov
Cited in 2 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2020
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Rebecca Brown v. Eric Brown (mem. dec.) (Indiana Court of Appeals 2020)“…d. at 70. Again, Mother only sets 4 See Ind. Code § 31-15-2-6(a) (requiring that, in order to filed f…”
- Rahlina D. Funk v. Raymond A. Funk (mem. dec.) (Indiana Court of Appeals 2016)“…has jurisdiction over the matter pursuant to I.C. 31-15-2-6. 4. There are two (2) m…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Indiana Divorce Laws (2026): Grounds, Residency, and Process
Indiana Code, TITLE 16. HEALTH
§ 16-37-2-2.1Paternity affidavits; requirements; forms; joint legal custody agreement; penalty; effect of paternity affidavit; genetic test; opportunity to consultIn force
Sec. 2.1. (a) A paternity affidavit may be executed as provided in this section through: (1) a hospital; or (2) a local health department. (b) Immediately before or after the birth of a child who is born out of wedlock, a person who attends or plans to attend the birth, including personnel of all public or private birthing hospitals, shall: (1) provide an opportunity for: (A) the child's mother; and (B) a man who reasonably appears to be the child's biological father; to execute an affidavit acknowledging paternity of the child; and (2) verbally explain to the individuals listed in subdivision (1) the legal effects of an executed paternity affidavit as described in subsection (j). (c) A paternity affidavit must be executed on a form provided by the state department. The paternity affidavit is valid only if the affidavit is executed as follows: (1) If executed through a hospital, the paternity affidavit must be completed not more than seventy-two (72) hours after the child's birth. (2) If executed through a local health department, the paternity affidavit must be completed before the child has reached the age of emancipation.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at iga.in.gov
Cited in 48 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Paternity of H.H. v. Hughes (Indiana Court of Appeals 2008, 879 N.E.2d 1175)“…31-14 or by filing a paternity affidavit in accordance with Ind.Code § 16-37-2-2.1. Ind.Code § 31-14-2-1. Once a man execu…”
- In Re the Paternity of S.C. (Indiana Court of Appeals 2012, 966 N.E.2d 143)“…C. ch. 31-14 or by execution of a paternity affidavit under I.C. § 16-37-2-2.1. See I.C. § 31-14-2-1; In re Paterni…”
- In Re the Paternity of E.M.L.G. (Indiana Court of Appeals 2007, 863 N.E.2d 867)“…(2) by executing a paternity affidavit in accordance with IC 16-37-2-2.1.” (Emphasis added). Furthermore, Indian…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Search our full record of US law — 2.1 million sections, every state + federal →
Sources and References
- IC 31-17-2-8 - Child custody; best interests; no presumption favoring either parent(iga.in.gov).gov
- IC 31-17-2-13 - Joint custody(iga.in.gov).gov
- IC 31-17-2-21 - Modification of custody order(iga.in.gov).gov
- IC 31-17-2.2 - Relocation of a child(iga.in.gov).gov
- IC 31-17-2.2-5 - Response to request for relocation; burden of proof (burden shifts to the nonrelocating parent on best interests)(iga.in.gov)
- IC 31-15-2-6 - Residence requirements for filing a dissolution petition (6 months in Indiana, 3 months in the county)(iga.in.gov)
- IC 31-14-13-1 - Sole legal custody in biological mother of a child born out of wedlock; exceptions(iga.in.gov)
- IC 31-14-13-2 - Custody factors in paternity cases; no presumption favoring either parent(iga.in.gov)
- IC 16-37-2-2.1 - Paternity affidavits; joint legal custody agreement; effect of paternity affidavit(iga.in.gov)
Paid attorney referral. RecordingLaw may receive compensation when you use an attorney-help link. RecordingLaw is not a law firm. Submitting a request does not guarantee that an attorney will accept your case and does not create an attorney-client relationship.