District of Columbia lawChild CustodyRelocationAdoptionDomestic ViolenceDivorce

Child Custody and Parenting Time in District of Columbia

September 26, 2026 · LawDiver Research Team

Start with D.C. Code §§ 16-911 to 16-914.02. In District of Columbia, District of Columbia uses Legal custody and physical custody; parenting time schedules implement physical custody.. Courts apply best-interests factors under D.C. Code § 16-914, including the child’s relationship with each parent, parental capacity, and any history of domestic violence. Joint custody is presumed to be in the child’s best interests unless rebutted by clear and convincing evidence of abuse or other statutory factors. That is the question this guide answers for child custody and parenting time. Relocation: A parent seeking to relocate with the child generally must show the move is in the child’s best interests; notice and modification practice follow Superior Court orders. Modification: A substantial and material change of circumstances is required to modify custody.

Best-interests factors in District of Columbia

Courts apply best-interests factors under D.C. Code § 16-914, including the child’s relationship with each parent, parental capacity, and any history of domestic violence.

Legal custody, physical custody, and parenting time

Legal custody and physical custody; parenting time schedules implement physical custody.

Joint custody is presumed to be in the child’s best interests unless rebutted by clear and convincing evidence of abuse or other statutory factors.

How the District of Columbia rule applies

Apply the District of Columbia authorities in order. The facts are simplified so the statute and the standard are visible.

Two parents in District of Columbia disagree about where the child lives during the school week, and one wants to move.

Use the labels District of Columbia actually uses: Legal custody and physical custody; parenting time schedules implement physical custody..
Apply the best-interests factors: Courts apply best-interests factors under D.C. Code § 16-914, including the child’s relationship with each parent, parental capacity, and any history of domestic violence.
Check any parenting presumption: Joint custody is presumed to be in the child’s best interests unless rebutted by clear and convincing evidence of abuse or other statutory factors.
If a move is proposed: A parent seeking to relocate with the child generally must show the move is in the child’s best interests; notice and modification practice follow Superior Court orders. Later changes follow: A substantial and material change of circumstances is required to modify custody.

Custody is addressed in divorce or a custody action in Family Division. Mediation may be ordered. Final judgments allocate legal and physical custody and a parenting schedule.

Relocation with a child

A parent seeking to relocate with the child generally must show the move is in the child’s best interests; notice and modification practice follow Superior Court orders.

Modifying a District of Columbia custody order

A substantial and material change of circumstances is required to modify custody.

How custody cases typically move in District of Columbia

Custody is addressed in divorce or a custody action in Family Division. Mediation may be ordered. Final judgments allocate legal and physical custody and a parenting schedule.

Case law: custody and parenting time in District of Columbia

Appeal of H.R. (In the Matter of BABY BOY C.) — Rogers, J., concurring

Appeal of H.R. (In the Matter of BABY BOY C.) — Rogers, J., concurring, 581 A.2d 1141 (1990)

…tutory standard in the District of Columbia for determining custody disputes between a natural parent and a stranger has been long settled. In Davis v. Jurney, 145 A.2d 846 (D.C.1958), the court stated: The controlling principle by which the courts must be guided in cases of this kind is well settled. The paramount concern is the child’s welfare and all other considerations, in…

Appeal of H.R. (In the Matter of BABY BOY C.) — Rogers, J., concurring is worth reading on District of Columbia child custody because the court put the point in its own words: "District of Columbia for determining custody disputes between a natural parent and a stranger has been long settled. In Davis v. Jurney, 145 A.2d 846 (D.C.1958), the court stated: The controlling principle by which the courts must be guided in cases of this kind is well settled." Use that passage as the starting point, then read the facts that precede it.

In the Matter of the Petition of D.I.S. for the Adoption of S.A.O.

In the Matter of the Petition of D.I.S. for the Adoption of S.A.O., 1985 D.C. App. LEXIS 415 (1985)

…f Human Services (hereinafter “DCDHS”) placed S.A.O. in the custody of foster father R.G. and foster mother S.L.G. The G.s, a Caucasian family with four natural children, had previously provided foster care for approximately ten children. At the time S.A.O. was initially placed with the G.s, the family lived in the Takoma Park subdivision of the District of Columbia. By early A…

District of Columbia opinions such as In the Matter of the Petition of D.I.S. for the Adoption of S.A.O. are cited where child custody is disputed. The court stated: "Human Services (hereinafter “DCDHS”) placed S.A.O. in the custody of foster father R.G. and foster mother S.L.G. The G.s, a Caucasian family with four natural children, had previously provided foster care for approximately ten children. At the time S.A.O." That is the language to brief; the rest of the decision supplies the procedural posture.

In Re BABY BOY C. H.R., Appellant

In Re BABY BOY C. H.R., Appellant, 1993 D.C. App. LEXIS 202 (1993)

…H.R. (the father and appellant). Mr. and Mrs. 0., with whom custody of the child was placed soon after birth, filed a petition for adoption in the Superior Court. After extended litigation, that court granted the petition, finding by clear and convincing evidence that adoption by the 0. family was in the child’s best interest. In the father’s appeal from that ruling, this court…

Practitioners open In Re BABY BOY C. H.R., Appellant when District of Columbia child custody turns on the distinction in this sentence: "H.R. (the father and appellant). Mr. and Mrs. 0., with whom custody of the child was placed soon after birth, filed a petition for adoption in the Superior Court." Do not lift it out of the facts the court was deciding.

Lawrence BAZEMORE, Appellant, v. Sharon DAVIS, Appellee

Lawrence BAZEMORE, Appellant, v. Sharon DAVIS, Appellee, 1978 D.C. App. LEXIS 569 (1978)

…ted en banc consideration of the issue of whether, in child custody disputes between natural parents, there is a valid presumption that the interest of a child of tender years is best served in the custody of the mother. *1378 The dispute arose on April 18, 1975, when appellee Sharon Davis sued appellant Lawrence Bazemore to regain custody of their minor child, Tonya. The case…

Practitioners open Lawrence BAZEMORE, Appellant, v. Sharon DAVIS, Appellee when District of Columbia child custody turns on the distinction in this sentence: "The dispute arose on April 18, 1975, when appellee Sharon Davis sued appellant Lawrence Bazemore to regain custody of their minor child, Tonya." Do not lift it out of the facts the court was deciding.

Key takeaways

Best-interests standard: Courts apply best-interests factors under D.
Labels used in District of Columbia: Legal custody and physical custody; parenting time schedules implement physical custody..
Parenting-time posture: Joint custody is presumed to be in the child’s best interests unless rebutted by clear and convincing evidence of abuse or other statutory factors.
Relocation: A parent seeking to relocate with the child generally must show the move is in the child’s best interests; notice and modification practice follow Superior Court orders.
Modification: A substantial and material change of circumstances is required to modify custody.
Primary authority: D.C. Code §§ 16-911 to 16-914.02.

Frequently asked questions

What does District of Columbia call “custody”?