Legal Definitions - Parental Kidnapping Prevention Act (PKPA)

The Parental Kidnapping Prevention Act (PKPA) is a federal law designed to prevent parents from moving children across state lines to seek more favorable custody rulings (often called "forum shopping") and to ensure that child custody orders issued by one state are recognized and enforced by other states.

It establishes national standards for determining which state has the legal authority, or jurisdiction, to make or modify a child custody order when parents live in different states. Under PKPA, if a state court issues a custody order in compliance with these federal standards, other states are generally required to give that order "full faith and credit," meaning they must respect and enforce it. This prevents conflicting custody orders and provides stability for children. If a state's own custody laws conflict with PKPA, the federal law takes precedence.

Here are some examples of how the PKPA applies:

• Enforcing an Initial Custody Order Across State Lines:

  Imagine Sarah and Mark divorce in California, where their child, Leo, has lived his entire life. The California court issues a custody order granting Sarah primary physical custody. Mark later moves to Nevada and, unhappy with the arrangement, attempts to file a new custody case there, hoping for a different outcome.

  How PKPA applies: Under PKPA, the Nevada court would recognize that California was Leo's "home state" and properly exercised jurisdiction to issue the initial custody order. Therefore, Nevada would be obligated to enforce the California order and would likely refuse to hear Mark's new custody case, preventing him from trying to get a different ruling in a new state.

• Preventing Forum Shopping for Custody Modifications:

  Consider Emily and David, who live in Texas with their daughter, Mia. A Texas court issues a custody order. A year later, David moves to Florida and, unhappy with the existing arrangement, files a motion in a Florida court to modify the custody order, claiming Florida should now decide because he lives there.

  How PKPA applies: PKPA would likely prevent the Florida court from modifying the Texas order. Texas would generally retain exclusive, continuing jurisdiction over Mia's custody case as long as Mia or one of her parents continues to live there and the Texas court has not declined jurisdiction. Florida would have to defer to Texas, reinforcing the idea that parents cannot simply move to another state to try and change an existing custody agreement.

• Addressing Parental Abduction and Emergency Situations:

  Suppose Lisa and Ben are divorced in New York, and their son, Sam, lives with Lisa in New York under a New York custody order. During a visitation, Ben takes Sam to Arizona without Lisa's permission and files an emergency custody petition in an Arizona court, claiming Lisa is an unfit parent.

  How PKPA applies: PKPA would guide the Arizona court. Even if Ben alleges an emergency, Arizona would typically communicate with the New York court. Since New York is Sam's home state and issued the original order, PKPA would mandate that New York retains primary jurisdiction. Arizona's role would likely be limited to addressing any immediate emergency to protect Sam, but it would generally be required to send the case back to New York for any long-term custody decisions, preventing Ben from using the move to Arizona to establish new jurisdiction and undermine the New York order.