[nymomof3]

I just moved back to NY and my husband is living in MO. He said he's going to try and get custody of the baby and has started the paperwork. Wondering if I could start custody paper before baby is born?

[twinkiedooter]

Before any custody can be decided the child has to be born.

[stevetcg]

Before any custody can be decided the child has to be born.

Except in CA.

[ScottGem]

Depending on your state laws, you MAY be able to initiate the paperwork. But no hearing or decision on custody will be made until the baby is born.

However, I believe any action needs to be started where the baby is born.

[cdad]

Depending on your state laws, you MAY be able to initiate the paperwork. But no hearing or decision on custody will be made until the baby is born.

However, I beleive any action needs to be started where the baby is born.

No the action can take place in his home state because the other party is the one that moved. He could file for custody there and she would have to return or at least return the child.

[cadillac59]

I just moved back to NY and my husband is living in MO. He said hes going to try and get custody of the baby and has started the paperwork. Wondering if i could start custody paper before baby is born??

You're going to have to check with a family law attorney in New York.

Many people are quite surprised to learn this, but in California you may file an action before the child is born and obtain pre-birth child custody orders. The decision can be made on custody, a visitation schedule, everything before the child's birth; however, obviously the actual effective date of the orders is not until the date the child is actually born. Other states may have the same rule or something similar so check it out.

[cadillac59]

No the action can take place in his home state because the other party is the one that moved. He could file for custody there and she would have to return or atleast return the child.

I have to disagree with you on that one. The UCCJEA focuses on the relationship of the child to the state, not the parents to the state. The Official Comments to the Act tell you that not to mention the Act makes that obvious. Also, it defines "home state jurisdiction" as the state where the child has resided with a parent or person acting as a parent for the 6 month period immediately preceding the date an action is filed to determine custody or, if the child is less than 6 months old, the state in which the child has continuously resided since birth. See, the problem with the UCCJEA is that it does not contemplate pre-birth custody orders. But that doesn't preclude a state from allowing them; it only creates a gaping hole in the law on child custody jurisdiction, which is fertile ground for creative lawyering. In my opinion jurisdiction would be proper in the state in which the mother intends to give birth, but I don't know how you could enforce orders predicated on that if the mother actually gave birth elsewhere. It raises an interesting question, however.