Pennsylvania Child Custody Agreement
Agreeing in Pennsylvania opens a consent order route under Rule 1915.7, and the court still applies the best interest standard and the current section 5328 factors on top of it.
Find out where you stand in Pennsylvania
Where are you with the custody arrangement?
DocDraft provides document preparation, not legal advice.
Introduction
Pennsylvania rewrote the statute at the center of every custody decision twice in about fourteen months. 23 Pa.C.S. 5328(a) now carries fourteen operative best interest factors, not the sixteen that most older material still reports, and five of its numbered paragraphs read '(Deleted by amendment)'. Four of the surviving factors deal with safety, and the statute directs the court to give those substantial weighted consideration ahead of the rest. When two parents agree, Pennsylvania gives them a defined route to an order: under Pa.R.C.P. 1915.7 they submit a proposed custody order bearing their written consent, or state the agreement on the record and then comply within ten days. That route does not remove the standard, because 23 Pa.C.S. 5323(a) permits a court to award any of the seven statutory custody types only if it is in the best interest of the child and only after considering the section 5328 factors. The useful work of a Pennsylvania agreement is therefore to be drafted in the statute's own vocabulary and against the current factor list rather than the one that circulated before 2024.
Key Things to Know
- 1
Pennsylvania gives agreeing parents a dedicated procedure rather than a shortcut past the standard. Pa.R.C.P. 1915.7 lets parties who have reached an agreement submit a proposed custody order bearing their written consent, or state the agreement on the record and comply within ten days, after which the court can memorialize the oral agreement in a written custody order. The award itself is still governed by 23 Pa.C.S. 5323(a), which allows a court to award custody only if it is in the best interest of the child and only after considering the section 5328 factors.
- 2
The factor list changed recently and most secondary material has not caught up. The codified amendment note on 23 Pa.C.S. 5328 shows subsection (a) amended by Act 8 of 2024 and again by Act 11 of 2025. The list now runs across nineteen numbered slots of which five, paragraphs (5), (8), (9), (10) and (13), read '(Deleted by amendment)', leaving fourteen operative factors. Act 11 also added section 5328(d), which requires the court to send every named party a copy of the factor section within 30 days of a custody complaint or petition.
- 3
Safety is weighted by statutory command, not by judicial habit. 23 Pa.C.S. 5328(a) requires substantial weighted consideration of paragraphs (1), (2), (2.1) and (2.2), which cover which party is more likely to ensure the safety of the child, present and past abuse by a party or a household member, child abuse and protective services information under section 5329.1(a), and violent or assaultive behavior. Section 5328(a.2) balances that by providing that no single factor is by itself determinative and that the court examines the totality of the circumstances.
- 4
Pennsylvania keeps the word custody but has retired the word visitation. 23 Pa.C.S. 5322(b) directs that where 'visitation' appears in a statute outside the custody chapter it may be construed to mean partial physical custody, shared physical custody, or supervised physical custody. Legal custody is the right to make major decisions including medical, religious and educational ones, while physical custody is actual physical possession and control, subdivided by share of time into sole, primary, partial and shared. Supervised physical custody is further split into professional and nonprofessional.
- 5
A parenting plan is optional in Pennsylvania, but its contents are prescribed. 23 Pa.C.S. 5331(a) says the court may require parties to submit parenting plans, and only in a contested custody proceeding, so parents who agree are never compelled to file one. When a plan is filed, section 5331(b) makes eight items mandatory and section 5331(c) reproduces a fill in the blank plan form inside the statute, including a decision grid allocating diet, religion, medical care, mental health care, discipline, choice of school, choice of study, school activities and sports activities. Section 5331(a) also provides that a parenting plan and a party's position set out in it are not admissible as evidence by another party.
- 6
The order has to be written tightly enough to be used. 23 Pa.C.S. 5323(f) requires a custody order to specify its terms in enough detail to be enforceable by law enforcement, and section 5323(g) supplies the contempt mechanism, which a private agreement that has never been entered as an order cannot reach. Section 5323(c) separately requires every custody order to contain notice of the parties' relocation obligations under section 5337, so an agreed order that omits it is defective.
- 7
Relocation has no mileage trigger in Pennsylvania. 23 Pa.C.S. 5322(a) defines relocation functionally, as a change in a child's residence that significantly impairs the other party's ability to exercise custodial rights, so a move across town can qualify and a longer move might not. Notice goes by certified mail, return receipt requested, no later than the 60th day before the proposed move, must enclose a blank counter-affidavit whose form section 5337(d)(1) sets out, and must warn that failing to object within 30 days forecloses objection. Section 5337(i)(1) places the burden of establishing that the relocation serves the child's best interest on the party proposing it.
Key decisions before you file
Before you file a Child Custody Agreement in Pennsylvania, 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
Pennsylvania Requirements for Child Custody Agreement
Parents who have reached an agreement may ask the court to enter a consent order incorporating its terms. They either submit a proposed custody order bearing their written consent, or state the agreement on the record, in which case they must comply within ten days or the court memorializes the oral agreement in a written custody order.
A Pennsylvania court may award any of the seven listed types of custody only if the award is in the best interest of the child, and only after considering the factors set out in section 5328. The standard applies to an agreed arrangement in the same terms as any other, and section 5338(a) allows a court to modify a custody order later to serve the child's best interest.
Subsection (a) was amended by Act 8 of 2024 and again by Act 11 of 2025. Paragraphs (5), (8), (9), (10) and (13) now read '(Deleted by amendment)', leaving fourteen operative factors across a list of nineteen numbered slots. The list is open rather than closed: the court considers all relevant factors and paragraph (16) is a catch all.
Section 5328(a) requires substantial weighted consideration of the four safety factors, paragraphs (1), (2), (2.1) and (2.2). Subsection (a.1) bars weighing a factor against a party where the circumstances were a response to abuse or were necessary to protect the child or an abused party, and bars counting temporary housing instability against the party alleging abuse. Subsection (a.2) provides that no single factor is by itself determinative. Subsection (d) requires the court to send every named party a copy of the section within 30 days of a custody complaint or petition.
Write the arrangement using the statutory terms: legal custody, shared or sole, for major decisions including medical, religious and educational ones, and physical custody, sole, primary, partial, shared or supervised, for actual possession and control. Supervised physical custody is split into professional and nonprofessional. Section 5322(b) construes 'visitation' in outside statutes into partial, shared or supervised physical custody, so the term should not be used as an operative label.
A parenting plan is not required, but if one is filed it must contain eight items: the schedule for personal care and control including parenting time, holidays and vacations; education and religious involvement; health care; child care arrangements; transportation arrangements; a dispute resolution procedure through mediation, arbitration or other means; any matter the court specifies; and any other matter serving the child's best interest. Subsection (c) sets out a fill in the blank plan form with a decision grid covering diet, religion, medical care, mental health care, discipline, choice of school, choice of study, school activities and sports activities.
A parenting plan, and the position a party sets out in that plan, are not admissible as evidence by another party. A proposal made while the parties are trying to settle cannot be turned into evidence against the parent who made it.
A custody order must specify its terms in enough detail to be enforceable by law enforcement, which means naming dates, times, and exchange locations rather than describing them loosely. Section 5323(g) supplies contempt authority for a custody order. A private agreement that has not been entered as an order cannot be enforced through that mechanism.
Every Pennsylvania custody order must include notice of the parties' relocation obligations under section 5337. An agreed order submitted for entry without that notice is missing a required element, so build the notice into the document rather than leaving it to the court.
Notice goes by certified mail, return receipt requested, no later than the 60th day before the proposed move, with a blank counter-affidavit enclosed and a warning that failing to object within 30 days forecloses objection. Section 5337(d)(1) reproduces the counter-affidavit form and section 5337(d)(3) presumes consent from a party who does not object in time. Section 5337(i)(1) places the burden of showing the move serves the child's best interest on the relocating party, and section 5337(i)(2) makes each party responsible for establishing the integrity of that party's own motives.
Frequently Asked Questions
Agreeing gives you a route into an order; the custody statute does not attach a different standard to it. Pa.R.C.P. 1915.7 lets parents who have an agreement ask for a consent order, either by submitting a proposed custody order bearing their written consent or by stating the agreement on the record and then complying within ten days. The award is still made under 23 Pa.C.S. 5323(a), which permits a custody award only if it is in the best interest of the child and only after considering the section 5328 factors, and section 5338(a) lets a court modify any custody order later to serve the child's best interest. One protection does attach to agreeing: under section 5331(a), a parenting plan and a party's position set out in it are not admissible as evidence by another party.
Yes. The arrangement carries legal force once the court enters it as an order, and Pa.R.C.P. 1915.7 is the route parents use for that. Until an order is entered, the terms cannot be enforced through the contempt authority in 23 Pa.C.S. 5323(g). Because section 5323(a) authorizes an award only where it is in the best interest of the child and only after the section 5328 factors have been considered, a judge is not obliged to enter terms simply because both parents signed them.
Fourteen operative factors, even though the list runs across nineteen numbered slots. 23 Pa.C.S. 5328(a) was amended by Act 8 of 2024 and again by Act 11 of 2025, and five paragraphs, (5), (8), (9), (10) and (13), now read '(Deleted by amendment)'. A great deal of older material still describes a sixteen factor list. The list is also not closed, because the section opens by directing the court to consider all relevant factors and paragraph (16) is a catch all for any other relevant factor.
Not as an operative term. 23 Pa.C.S. 5322(b) provides that where 'visitation' is used in reference to child custody in a statute outside the custody chapter, it may be construed to mean partial physical custody, shared physical custody, or supervised physical custody. Section 5323(a) lists the seven types of custody a court can actually award. Using the old word will not void an agreement, but writing the arrangement in the statute's own terms makes what you are asking for unambiguous.
No. 23 Pa.C.S. 5331(a) applies only in a contested custody proceeding, and even there it says the court may require the parties to submit parenting plans, so no Pennsylvania parent files one as of right. If a plan is filed, section 5331(b) requires eight items: the schedule for personal care and control including parenting time, holidays and vacations; education and religious involvement; health care; child care arrangements; transportation arrangements; a procedure for resolving proposed changes, disputes and alleged breaches through mediation, arbitration or other means; any matter the court specifies; and any other matter serving the child's best interest.
Notice must be sent by certified mail, return receipt requested, no later than the 60th day before the date of the proposed relocation, under 23 Pa.C.S. 5337(c). There is no mileage or state line threshold. Relocation is defined at section 5322(a) as a change in a child's residence that significantly impairs the other party's ability to exercise custodial rights, which is a functional test rather than a distance test. Section 5337(b) provides that no relocation may occur unless every individual with custody rights consents or the court approves it.
The notice must enclose a blank counter-affidavit, and 23 Pa.C.S. 5337(d)(1) reproduces that form in the statute, with options to consent to the move, to consent to the move but object to the proposed custody modification, or to object to both. An objection must be filed within 30 days of receipt and served by certified mail, return receipt requested. Under section 5337(d)(3) a party who does not object in time is presumed to have consented, and section 5337(d)(4) prevents that party from later having the court take testimony challenging the relocation.
The party proposing the move. 23 Pa.C.S. 5337(i)(1) places the burden of establishing that the relocation will serve the child's best interest on the relocating party, measured against the ten relocation factors in section 5337(h), which are a separate list from the custody factors in section 5328(a). Section 5337(i)(2) adds that each party bears the burden of establishing the integrity of that party's own motives, whether seeking or opposing the move. Section 5337(l) provides that if a party relocates before the expedited hearing, the court gives no presumption in favor of the relocation.
If a court finds by a preponderance of the evidence that there is an ongoing risk of abuse of the child, 23 Pa.C.S. 5323(e.1) creates a rebuttable presumption that the court will allow only supervised physical custody. That is a presumption about supervision, not a presumption against shared custody as such. Section 5323(e) requires an order made on a finding of a history of abuse or present risk of harm to state the safety conditions and the reasons for them, and section 5329(a) requires the court to determine that a party does not pose a threat of harm to the child before making any award where that party or a household member has been convicted of one of roughly forty listed offenses. If there has been abuse, coercion, or a protective order, this is a situation to take to a lawyer rather than settle on a form.
No. Support is a separate calculation under a separate set of rules, and a parenting schedule does not resolve it. Keep the two questions apart and deal with support in its own filing.