Oregon Child Custody Agreement
In Oregon, agreeing is not a way to improve your odds of joint custody; it is the only thing that makes joint custody legally available at all.
Find out where you stand in Oregon
Where are you with the custody arrangement?
DocDraft provides document preparation, not legal advice.
Introduction
Oregon puts a parental agreement at the front of the custody analysis rather than the end of it. Under Oregon Revised Statutes 107.169(3), a court shall not order joint custody unless both parents agree to the terms and conditions of the order. That makes agreement a precondition rather than a reward, and it cuts both ways: one parent's refusal defeats joint custody outright, no matter what a judge thinks of the merits. The statute then runs in the parents' favor as well, because 107.169(4) provides that where the parents have agreed to joint custody, the court may not overrule that agreement by ordering sole custody to one parent. None of that takes the court out of the picture. Oregon requires a parenting plan to be developed and filed in any proceeding to establish or modify a judgment providing for parenting time with a child, and ORS 107.105(1)(b) directs the court to review that plan and, if approved, incorporate it into the final order. The short version is that in Oregon your agreement decides whether joint custody is even on the table, and the court still decides whether the terms you wrote go into the judgment.
Key Things to Know
- 1
Agreement is the gateway to joint custody in Oregon, not a bonus. ORS 107.169(3) states that the court shall not order joint custody unless both parents agree to the terms and conditions of the order, so a single parent's objection ends the question. ORS 107.169(4) then protects the deal from the other side: where parents have agreed to joint custody, the court may not overrule that agreement by ordering sole custody to one parent. If either parent objects to a request for joint custody, ORS 107.179(1) requires the court to refer the parents to mediation for up to 90 days before deciding custody.
- 2
The agreement still is not self-executing. The parents develop and file a parenting plan, and under ORS 107.105(1)(b) the court shall review it and, if approved, incorporate it into the court's final order. Once incorporated, the parenting plan is determinative of parenting time rights. ORS 107.104(1)(b) tells courts to enforce a settlement to the fullest extent possible except where doing so would violate the law or clearly contravene public policy, which is a narrow but real limit on what parents can write.
- 3
Oregon kept the word custody but changed the contact vocabulary. The statute speaks of sole custody and joint custody, and of parenting time rather than visitation, which between parents is the wrong word in Oregon. Joint custody under ORS 107.169(1) is defined around decision-making: it means the parents share rights and responsibilities for major decisions concerning the child, including the child's residence, education, health care and religious training. It does not imply equal time, and the same subsection lets a joint custody order name one home as the primary residence and give one parent sole power over specified matters.
- 4
A parenting plan is mandatory, but almost all of its contents are optional. ORS 107.102(1) provides that in any proceeding to establish or modify a judgment providing for parenting time, a parenting plan shall be developed and filed with the court and included in the judgment, and the plan may be either general or detailed. Exactly one item is compulsory: a general plan must set forth the minimum amount of parenting time and access the noncustodial parent is entitled to have, under ORS 107.102(2). The nine topics listed for a detailed plan in ORS 107.102(3) are things a plan may include, and ORS 107.101(4) states a policy of giving parents and courts the widest discretion in developing a parenting plan.
- 5
If the parents cannot produce a plan, the court builds one. ORS 107.102(5)(a) requires the court to develop a detailed parenting plan itself where the parents are unable to agree on one, or where either parent asks the court to do so, and in doing so the court may consider only the best interests of the child and the safety of the parties. ORS 107.102(5)(c) adds that equal parenting time may be ordered, and that a parent's request for equal parenting time can be denied only by written findings that equal time is not in the child's best interests or would endanger the safety of a party.
- 6
Oregon gives an unusually strong enforcement clause. Under ORS 107.104(2), a party may enforce the terms of a stipulated judgment signed by the parties, a judgment resulting from a settlement on the record, or a judgment incorporating a marital settlement agreement as contract terms using contract remedies, by imposing any remedy available to enforce a judgment including contempt, or by any combination of the two. Two limits matter. The deal has to have been reduced to a judgment first, so a private unfiled agreement is not covered, and ORS 107.104 sits in the chapter governing suits for annulment, dissolution and separation.
- 7
Six best-interest factors govern the custody award, and the list is open. ORS 107.137(1)(a) through (f) sets them out for determining custody, and ORS 107.137(2) allows the court to weigh any other relevant factor while forbidding it from isolating any one of them. Three limits travel with the list: ORS 107.137(3) bars considering a party's disability unless disability-related behaviors endanger the child, ORS 107.137(4) bars considering conduct, marital status, income, social environment or lifestyle unless shown to cause emotional or physical damage to the child, and ORS 107.137(5) bars any preference based on the parent's gender. These factors govern the custody award itself; when the court builds a parenting plan under ORS 107.102(5) it may consider only best interests and party safety.
Key decisions before you file
Before you file a Child Custody Agreement in Oregon, a few decisions shape the document: which option to choose and what each one means. The Child Custody Agreement guide walks through them.
Open the Child Custody Agreement guideCustomize your Child Custody Agreement Template with DocDraft
Oregon Requirements for Child Custody Agreement
The court shall not order joint custody unless both parents agree to the terms and conditions of the order. A joint custody agreement should state on its face that both parents agree to its terms and conditions, because a parent's refusal defeats joint custody regardless of the merits.
Where the parents have agreed to joint custody in an order or judgment, the court may not overrule that agreement by ordering sole custody to one parent. The route away from an agreed joint custody arrangement is a modification under ORS 107.169(5).
In any proceeding to establish or modify a judgment providing for parenting time with a child, a parenting plan shall be developed and filed with the court and included in the judgment. The plan may be general or detailed. Matters filed under ORS 107.700 to 107.735 are carved out.
A general parenting plan must set forth the minimum amount of parenting time and access the noncustodial parent is entitled to have. This is the only content item Oregon makes compulsory, so it should never be left blank.
A detailed plan may include, and need not be limited to, a residential schedule, holiday, birthday and vacation planning, weekends including holidays and school in-service days, decision-making and responsibility, information sharing and access, relocation of parents, telephone access, transportation, and methods for resolving disputes. These topics are permissive, not required.
Where the parents cannot agree on a plan, or where either parent asks, the court develops a detailed plan itself and may consider only the best interests of the child and the safety of the parties. A parent's request for equal parenting time may be denied only by written findings that equal time is not in the child's best interests or would endanger a party's safety.
The court shall review the parenting plan and, if approved, incorporate it into the court's final order. When incorporated, the parenting plan is determinative of parenting time rights. The document is not enforceable as a custody order before that point.
Terms set out in a stipulated judgment signed by the parties, a judgment resulting from a settlement on the record, or a judgment incorporating a marital settlement agreement may be enforced as contract terms using contract remedies, by any remedy available to enforce a judgment including contempt, or by any combination. The terms must first be reduced to a judgment.
Neither parent may move to a residence more than 60 miles further distant from the other parent without giving reasonable notice of the change of residence and providing a copy of the notice to the court. Oregon prescribes no fixed number of days, so parents who want a firm period should write one into the plan.
Six factors at 107.137(1)(a) through (f) apply to the custody determination, and 107.137(2) allows any other relevant factor while barring reliance on a single isolated factor and creating a rebuttable presumption against awarding sole or joint custody to a parent who has committed abuse. Subsections (3), (4) and (5) bar consideration of disability absent endangering behaviors, of conduct, marital status, income, social environment or lifestyle absent proven harm, and of parental gender.
Frequently Asked Questions
Joint custody is off the table. Oregon Revised Statutes 107.169(3) provides that the court shall not order joint custody unless both parents agree to the terms and conditions of the order, so a parent who simply refuses can defeat joint custody whatever the court thinks of the merits. Where either parent objects to a joint custody request, ORS 107.179(1) requires the court to refer the parents to mediation for a period of up to 90 days before deciding custody. If no agreement follows, the court decides between sole custody arrangements.
Not by overruling the agreement. ORS 107.169(4) provides that where the parents have agreed to joint custody in an order or judgment, the court may not overrule that agreement by ordering sole custody to one parent. The route away from an agreed joint custody arrangement is a later modification under ORS 107.169(5), which requires a change of circumstances and the best interests of the child, and which expressly counts an inability or unwillingness to continue to cooperate as a sufficient change of circumstances.
Yes. ORS 107.105(1)(b) provides that the court shall review the parenting plan and, if approved, incorporate the parenting plan into the court's final order, and that when incorporated the plan is determinative of parenting time rights. Until that happens the document is not enforceable as a custody order. ORS 107.104(1)(b) separately directs courts to enforce settlements to the fullest extent possible except where doing so would violate the law or clearly contravene public policy.
Yes. ORS 107.102(1) provides that in any proceeding to establish or modify a judgment providing for parenting time with a child, a parenting plan shall be developed and filed with the court and included in the judgment. The plan may be either general or detailed. The one carve-out in the section is for matters filed under the Family Abuse Prevention Act provisions at ORS 107.700 to 107.735.
Less than parents usually expect. Only one item is compulsory: under ORS 107.102(2) a general plan must set forth the minimum amount of parenting time and access the noncustodial parent is entitled to have. ORS 107.102(3) then lists nine topics a detailed plan may include, covering the residential schedule, holiday and vacation planning, weekends and school in-service days, decision-making and responsibility, information sharing and access, relocation of parents, telephone access, transportation, and methods for resolving disputes. ORS 107.101(4) states a policy of giving parents and courts the widest discretion in developing a plan. Child support is calculated separately under Oregon's support rules and is not settled by a parenting plan.
No. ORS 107.169(1) defines joint custody around decision-making, as an arrangement by which parents share rights and responsibilities for major decisions concerning the child, including residence, education, health care and religious training. The same subsection allows a joint custody order to name one home as the child's primary residence and to give one parent sole authority over specified matters. Equal parenting time can be ordered, and ORS 107.102(5)(c) provides that a parent's request for equal parenting time may be denied only by written findings that it is not in the child's best interests or would endanger the safety of a party.
Oregon sets no number of days. Under ORS 107.159(1), neither parent may move to a residence more than 60 miles further distant from the other parent without giving the other parent reasonable notice of the change of residence and providing a copy of that notice to the court. The 60 is a distance, not a deadline, and reasonable notice is left undefined. There is no objection window, no petition procedure and no allocation of the burden of proof, so a contested move is handled as an ordinary modification under ORS 107.135 using the best interest factors in ORS 107.137. Because relocation of parents is one of the topics a detailed plan may cover under ORS 107.102(3), parents who want a firm notice period usually write one into their own plan.
Oregon gives two routes and lets a parent use both. ORS 107.104(2) provides that the court may enforce the terms set forth in a stipulated judgment signed by the parties, a judgment resulting from a settlement on the record, or a judgment incorporating a marital settlement agreement as contract terms using contract remedies, by imposing any remedy available to enforce a judgment including contempt, or by any combination of those. The terms must have been reduced to a judgment first, and enforcement is sought by motion, with all claims arising out of the same acts required to be joined under ORS 107.104(3).
ORS 107.137(1) sets out six factors at (a) through (f), and ORS 107.137(2) lets the court consider any other relevant factor while forbidding it from isolating any single one. The same subsection creates a rebuttable presumption that it is not in the child's best interests to award sole or joint custody to a parent who has committed abuse. ORS 107.137(3), (4) and (5) put three matters off limits: a party's disability unless disability-related behaviors endanger the child, conduct, marital status, income, social environment or lifestyle unless shown to cause emotional or physical damage to the child, and any preference based on the parent's gender.
In several separate ways. The abuse of one parent by the other is an enumerated best interest factor under ORS 107.137(1)(d). ORS 107.137(2) adds a rebuttable presumption that awarding sole or joint custody to a parent who has committed abuse is not in the child's best interests. ORS 107.137(1)(f) also shuts off the friendly-parent inquiry, so the court may not weigh a parent's willingness to facilitate the other parent's relationship with the child where that parent shows a sexual assault or a pattern of abuse together with endangerment. Separately, ORS 107.137(6) is a conviction-based bar rather than a presumption, denying custody and parenting time where a parent was convicted of rape under ORS 163.355, 163.365 or 163.375 and the child was conceived as a result. A party may also ask for mediation to be waived under ORS 107.179(3) on a showing that participating would cause severe emotional distress. If there has been abuse or a protective order, this is a situation to raise with a lawyer rather than settle on a form.