Arkansas Child Custody Agreement

Introduction

Key Things to Know

1. 1

   Agreeing is a rebuttal ground in Arkansas, not a credential. Section 9-13-101(a)(1)(A)(iv)(a) presumes joint custody is in the child's best interest in an original custody determination in a divorce or paternity matter, and (iv)(b) makes reaching an agreement on all issues related to custody one of the ways that presumption is rebutted. The effect is that a complete agreement removes the state's preference rather than earning your arrangement any weight, and it does so automatically, with no findings required.

2. 2

   Nothing in Arkansas law tells a judge to adopt what you filed. There is no ratification procedure, no statutory instruction about what the court does with a submitted agreement, and no provision that makes the terms enforceable between you before a decree exists. Act 604 added a freestanding command at Section 9-13-101(b)(1)(A)(vi) that a court shall consider the best interest of the child when making a child custody determination, and it is not conditioned on the parents disagreeing. The agreement becomes enforceable when the circuit court incorporates it into a custody or divorce decree, and not before.

3. 3

   The presumption is harder to displace by fighting than by settling. If a party objects to joint custody and the case is decided on the merits, Section 9-13-101(a)(1)(A)(iv)(b)(1) requires the court to find by clear and convincing evidence that joint custody is not in the child's best interest. Act 604 also changed Section 9-13-101(b)(1)(A)(ii) from may to shall, so the court is now required to consider awarding joint custody. An agreement clears that same bar with no finding at all.

4. 4

   Arkansas enumerates no best interest factors. Section 9-13-101 sets the standard and, through Act 604, adds at Section 9-13-101(b)(1)(A)(vi) that a court shall consider the best interest of the child when making a child custody determination, but the section contains no list of factors anywhere in it. What Arkansas judges actually weigh comes from decided cases rather than from the statute. A form that recites a numbered factor list is not describing Arkansas law.

5. 5

   Arkansas has no parenting plan statute. No plan has to be filed, no plan contents are prescribed, and nothing compels parents to submit a schedule at all. What Act 604 did instead was put the drafting duty on the court: under Section 9-13-101(b)(3), a court that holds a hearing on the merits and finds the joint custody presumption rebutted shall enter a written order containing its findings and a parenting time schedule that maximizes each parent's time and is consistent with the child's best interest, and under Section 9-13-101(b)(1)(A)(vii)(b) the court shall, at a party's request, issue a written order specific as to the frequency, timing, duration, condition, and method of scheduling parenting time for a parent not granted sole, primary, or joint custody. Because the Section 9-13-101(b)(3) duty is triggered by a hearing on the merits, parents who settle get no court-drafted schedule, and the one in their agreement is the only one there is.

6. 6

   There is no Arkansas relocation statute. Chapter 13 of Title 9 sets no notice period, no mileage threshold, and no procedure for objecting to a move, so there is no statutory number to write into your agreement. Any notice you want before a parent moves has to come from a term you draft yourselves. Once the decree is entered, changing the arrangement means going back to court.

7. 7

   Domestic abuse changes the analysis at two levels, and the difference between them matters. Subsection (c) of Section 9-13-101 requires the court to consider the effect of domestic violence on the child's best interest once allegations are proven by a preponderance of the evidence, counting a single act whether or not the child was physically injured or personally witnessed the abuse, while the rebuttable presumption against placing a child in the custody of an abusive parent requires a finding by a preponderance that the parent has engaged in a pattern of domestic abuse. Act 604 wired this into the joint custody rule as well, since Section 9-13-101(a)(1)(A)(iv)(b)(4) rebuts the joint custody presumption where a rebuttable presumption described in subsection (c) or subsection (d) of that section is established by the evidence. If abuse, coercion, or a protective order is part of your situation, talk to a lawyer rather than work from a form.

Arkansas Requirements for Child Custody Agreement

• Joint Custody Presumption Under Ark. Code Ann. 9-13-101(a)(1)(A)(iv)(a)

  Added by Act 604 of 2021, this creates a rebuttable presumption that joint custody is in the best interest of the child in an original custody determination in a divorce or paternity matter. It is the backdrop against which any Arkansas custody agreement is read.

• Agreement on All Custody Issues as a Rebuttal Ground Under Ark. Code Ann. 9-13-101(a)(1)(A)(iv)(b)

  One of the listed grounds rebutting the joint custody presumption is that the parties have reached an agreement on all issues related to custody of the child. A complete parental agreement therefore removes the presumption automatically, without any finding by the court.

• Clear and Convincing Standard in Contested Cases Under Ark. Code Ann. 9-13-101(a)(1)(A)(iv)(b)(1)

  Where a party objects to joint custody, the court must find by clear and convincing evidence that joint custody is not in the child's best interest. That evidentiary bar applies to the litigated route and not to an agreed one.

• Mandatory Consideration of Joint Custody Under Ark. Code Ann. 9-13-101(b)(1)(A)(ii)

  Act 604 of 2021 changed this provision from may to shall, so an Arkansas court is required to consider awarding joint custody. An agreement that asks for something other than joint custody should be specific about the arrangement it proposes instead.

• Best Interest Determination Under Ark. Code Ann. 9-13-101(b)(1)(A)(vi)

  The court shall consider the best interest of the child when making a child custody determination. The duty is unconditional and is not removed because the parents have agreed, and Arkansas sets out no enumerated list of best interest factors anywhere in the section.

• Written Parenting Time Order on Request Under Ark. Code Ann. 9-13-101(b)(1)(A)(vii)(b)

  On a party's request, the court shall issue a written order specific as to the frequency, timing, duration, condition, and method of scheduling parenting time for a parent not granted sole, primary, or joint custody, taking the child's developmental age into account. Drafting the agreed schedule in those same terms matches what the order would contain.

• Written Order After a Hearing on the Merits Under Ark. Code Ann. 9-13-101(b)(3)

  Where the court holds a hearing on the merits and finds the joint custody presumption rebutted, it shall enter a written order containing the facts, findings, and conclusions of law explaining its decision and a parenting time schedule that maximizes each parent's time and is consistent with the child's best interest. This duty follows a merits hearing, so an agreed case does not produce a court-drafted schedule.

• Parenting Time and Visitation Terminology Under Ark. Code Ann. 9-13-101(b)(1)(A)(vii)

  Arkansas keeps ordinary custody vocabulary and runs parenting time and visitation side by side in the same section, with parenting time introduced by Act 604 of 2021. The document may use either, but should be internally consistent.

• No Relocation Provision in Ark. Code Ann. Title 9, Chapter 13

  Arkansas has no relocation statute, no notice period, no distance threshold, and no objection procedure for a parent who moves. Any notice or consent requirement before a move exists only if the parents write it into the agreement.

• Domestic Abuse Presumption Under Ark. Code Ann. 9-13-101(c), Cross-Referenced at 9-13-101(a)(1)(A)(iv)(b)(4)

  Proven allegations of domestic violence must be considered in the best interest analysis, and a finding of a pattern of domestic abuse raises a rebuttable presumption against placing the child in that parent's custody. Establishing that presumption also rebuts the joint custody presumption under the cross-reference added by Act 604 of 2021.