Kansas uses Legal custody and residency / parenting time.. Courts apply best-interests factors under § 23-3203, including the child’s adjustment, each parent’s ability to meet needs, and any history of domestic abuse. Joint legal custody is common; residency is awarded based on best interests with a parenting-time schedule. That is what separates Kansas child custody and parenting time from a generic national summary. Read Kan. Stat. Ann. §§ 23-3201 to 23-3221 before the background sections below. Relocation: A parent seeking to change the child’s residence generally must give notice and may need court approval if the move would disrupt the parenting plan. Modification: A material change of circumstances is required to modify custody or residency.
Legal custody, physical custody, and parenting time
Legal custody and residency / parenting time.
Joint legal custody is common; residency is awarded based on best interests with a parenting-time schedule.
Relocation with a child
A parent seeking to change the child’s residence generally must give notice and may need court approval if the move would disrupt the parenting plan.
Modifying a Kansas custody order
A material change of circumstances is required to modify custody or residency.
A concrete Kansas scenario
Here is one way the Kansas pieces fit together. Change any fact and the statute may point somewhere else.
Two parents in Kansas disagree about where the child lives during the school week, and one wants to move.
- Use the labels Kansas actually uses: Legal custody and residency / parenting time..
- Apply the best-interests factors: Courts apply best-interests factors under § 23-3203, including the child’s adjustment, each parent’s ability to meet needs, and any history of domestic abuse.
- Check any parenting presumption: Joint legal custody is common; residency is awarded based on best interests with a parenting-time schedule.
- If a move is proposed: A parent seeking to change the child’s residence generally must give notice and may need court approval if the move would disrupt the parenting plan. Later changes follow: A material change of circumstances is required to modify custody or residency.
Custody is addressed in divorce or a separate parenting proceeding. Mediation is often ordered. Final decrees allocate legal custody, residency, and parenting time.
How custody cases typically move in Kansas
Custody is addressed in divorce or a separate parenting proceeding. Mediation is often ordered. Final decrees allocate legal custody, residency, and parenting time.
Related Kansas guides
Case law: custody and parenting time in Kansas
In the Matter of the Adoption of A.A.T., a Minor Child — Rosen, J., dissenting
In the Matter of the Adoption of A.A.T., a Minor Child — Rosen, J., dissenting, 287 Kan. 590 (2008)
…The best interests of a child are the implicit goal of any custody determination and should be considered here, even though K.S.A. 59-2136 did not expressly require the district court to do so. When this court makes the statutory rights of the adoptive parents and the due process rights of the natural father dispositive, it dehumanizes A.A.T., treating him as if he were a piec…
Kansas opinions such as In the Matter of the Adoption of A.A.T., a Minor Child — Rosen, J., dissenting are cited where child custody is disputed. The court stated: "The best interests of a child are the implicit goal of any custody determination and should be considered here, even though K.S.A. 59-2136 did not expressly require the district court to do so." That is the language to brief; the rest of the decision supplies the procedural posture.
Catherine S. Sheppard, Appellant, v. Steven H. Sheppard, Appellee. Roy Sumner and Dorothy Sumner, Intervenors and
…This appeal is from the trial court’s resolution of a child custody dispute arising from a post-divorce motion to change permanent custody of a minor child, Patrick Sheppard. The mother, Catherine S. Sheppard, is the plaintiff and appellant. The maternal grandparents, Roy Sumner and Dorothy Sumner, to whom custody was granted, are the intervenors and appellees. The adoptive fat…
Kansas opinions such as Catherine S. Sheppard, Appellant, v. Steven H. Sheppard, Appellee. Roy Sumner and Dorothy Sumner, Intervenors and are cited where child custody is disputed. The court stated: "This appeal is from the trial court’s resolution of a child custody dispute arising from a post-divorce motion to change permanent custody of a minor child, Patrick Sheppard. The mother, Catherine S. Sheppard, is the plaintiff and appellant." That is the language to brief; the rest of the decision supplies the procedural posture.
In the Matter of the Guardianship of Nolynn Glendon Williams, a Minor Child
In the Matter of the Guardianship of Nolynn Glendon Williams, a Minor Child, 254 Kan. 814 (1994)
…an unfit mother or that she was unfit to have the care and custody of Nolynn. The answer did allege that it would be in Nolynn’s best interests for the guardianship to be continued. Kathleen’s petition for termination of the guardianship was heard by the district court on February 5, 1993. There was considerable testimony about the lifestyles of Kathleen and Cindy, their plans…
Practitioners open In the Matter of the Guardianship of Nolynn Glendon Williams, a Minor Child when Kansas child custody turns on the distinction in this sentence: "Nolynn. The answer did allege that it would be in Nolynn’s best interests for the guardianship to be continued. Kathleen’s petition for termination of the guardianship was heard by the district court on February 5, 1993." Do not lift it out of the facts the court was deciding.
In the Matter of the Marriage of Kimberly Whipp, Appellee, and Christian Whipp, Appellant
…l change of circumstances sufficient to justify a change in custody of the parties5 minor child and whether that change was in the child’s best interests. The district court concluded a change in custody *501 was appropriate. The Court of Appeals reversed, finding the district court had not articulated findings of fact to support its conclusion. We granted review. FACTS: Christ…
Kansas opinions such as In the Matter of the Marriage of Kimberly Whipp, Appellee, and Christian Whipp, Appellant are cited where child custody is disputed. The court stated: "The district court concluded a change in custody *501 was appropriate. The Court of Appeals reversed, finding the district court had not articulated findings of fact to support its conclusion. We granted review." That is the language to brief; the rest of the decision supplies the procedural posture.
Bradford M. Johnson, Individually and Natural Guardian of Corrine Louise Stephenson-Johnson, Appellant, v. Sherry M
Pierron, J.: This case arises out of a child custody case in Johnson County, Kansas District Court from a parentage action and the resulting custody agreement involving the parties in the Santa Fe, New Mexico District Court. Corrine Louise Stephenson-Johnson was born on November 30, 1989, from a liaison between Bradford Johnson and Sherry Stephenson while both we…
On child custody, Bradford M. Johnson, Individually and Natural Guardian of Corrine Louise Stephenson-Johnson, Appellant, v. Sherry M speaks to the Kansas dispute in this passage: "Pierron, J.: This case arises out of a child custody case in Johnson County, Kansas District Court from a parentage action and the resulting custody agreement involving the parties in the Santa Fe, New Mexico District Court." The surrounding opinion shows how the court applied that language to the record.
In the Matter of the Marriage of David B. Debenham, Appellant, and Donna L. (Debenham) Ellis, Appellee
…Ellis were divorced in 1990; the trial court awarded joint custody of Cortney, with Donna having primary residential custody. Under the order, both parents had equal rights to make decisions regarding Cortney’s schooling and educational placement. Donna enrolled Cortney in the Cair Paravel Latin school against David’s wishes. Eventually, the trial court ruled that Cortney rema…
Kansas opinions such as In the Matter of the Marriage of David B. Debenham, Appellant, and Donna L. (Debenham) Ellis, Appellee are cited where child custody is disputed. The court stated: "Ellis were divorced in 1990; the trial court awarded joint custody of Cortney, with Donna having primary residential custody. Under the order, both parents had equal rights to make decisions regarding Cortney’s schooling and educational placement." That is the language to brief; the rest of the decision supplies the procedural posture.
In the interest of L.A.M. and R.K.M., Children under 18 years of age
In the interest of L.A.M. and R.K.M., Children under 18 years of age, 268 Kan. 441 (2000)
…nd R.K.M., minors, appeals the trial court’s order granting custody of L.A.M. and R.K.M. to their father’s cousin, Saul J. Miguel, and his wife, Janet F. Miguel. Rubicela and Nahum Miguel were the parents of L.A.M. and R.K.M. It appears Nahum murdered Rubicela and fled. Nahum’s whereabouts remain unknown. R.K.M. witnessed the murder. The trial court severed Nahum’s parental rig…
In the interest of L.A.M. and R.K.M., Children under 18 years of age is worth reading on Kansas child custody because the court put the point in its own words: "R.K.M., minors, appeals the trial court’s order granting custody of L.A.M. and R.K.M. to their father’s cousin, Saul J. Miguel, and his wife, Janet F. Miguel. Rubicela and Nahum Miguel were the parents of L.A.M. and R.K.M. It appears Nahum murdered Rubicela and fled." Use that passage as the starting point, then read the facts that precede it.
In the Interest of R.C., D.C., M.C., S.C., and C.C., All Minor Children
In the Interest of R.C., D.C., M.C., S.C., and C.C., All Minor Children, 21 Kan. App. 2d 702 (1995)
…appeals the district court’s denial of his motion to obtain custody of his children. He argues that the trial court erred by giving precedent consideration to the best interests of the child rule over the parental preference doctrine in a child in need of care action. We affirm. Carlyle was married to Viola, the natural mother of R.C., D.C., M.C., S.C., and C.C., on June 15, 19…
Practitioners open In the Interest of R.C., D.C., M.C., S.C., and C.C., All Minor Children when Kansas child custody turns on the distinction in this sentence: "He argues that the trial court erred by giving precedent consideration to the best interests of the child rule over the parental preference doctrine in a child in need of care action. We affirm. Carlyle was married to Viola, the natural mother of R.C., D.C., M.C., S.C., and C.C." Do not lift it out of the facts the court was deciding.
Key takeaways
- Best-interests standard: Courts apply best-interests factors under § 23-3203, including the child’s adjustment, each parent’s ability to meet needs, and any history of domestic abuse.
- Labels used in Kansas: Legal custody and residency / parenting time..
- Parenting-time posture: Joint legal custody is common; residency is awarded based on best interests with a parenting-time schedule.
- Relocation: A parent seeking to change the child’s residence generally must give notice and may need court approval if the move would disrupt the parenting plan.
- Modification: A material change of circumstances is required to modify custody or residency.
- Primary authority: Kan. Stat. Ann. §§ 23-3201 to 23-3221.
Best-interests factors in Kansas
Courts apply best-interests factors under § 23-3203, including the child’s adjustment, each parent’s ability to meet needs, and any history of domestic abuse.
Frequently asked questions
What does Kansas call “custody”?
Legal custody and residency / parenting time.
Can I move out of state with my child?
A parent seeking to change the child’s residence generally must give notice and may need court approval if the move would disrupt the parenting plan.
How do I change an existing custody order in Kansas?
A material change of circumstances is required to modify custody or residency.
This guide covers Kansas custody law as of 2026. Verify the live statute and any local parenting-time guidelines before relying on this summary.