Custody in West Virginia.

Decisions against where the child lives

Two separate statutes. Sec. 48-9-206 allocates 'custodial responsibility' – the actual time the child spends with each parent. Sec. 48-9-207 allocates 'responsibility for making significant life decisions on behalf of the child, including the child's education and health care,' to one parent or to both jointly. Sec. 48-9-207(c): 'Unless otherwise agreed to by the parents or ordered by the court, each parent who is exercising custodial responsibility shall be given sole responsibility for day-to-day decisions for the child, while the child is in that parent's care and control, including emergency decisions affecting the health and safety of the child.'

What the judge must weigh

§48-9-102. Objectives; best interests of the child. (a) The primary objective of this article is to serve the child’s best interests, by facilitating:

1. (1) Stability of the child;
2. (2) Parental planning and agreement about the child’s custodial arrangements and upbringing;
3. (3) Continuity of existing parent-child attachments;
4. (4) Meaningful contact between a child and each parent;
5. (5) Caretaking and parenting relationships by adults who love the child, know how to provide for the child’s needs, and who place a high priority on doing so;
6. (6) Security from exposure to physical or emotional harm;
7. (7) Expeditious, predictable decisionmaking, and avoidance of prolonged uncertainty respecting arrangements for the child’s care and control; and
8. (8) Meaningful contact between a child and his or her siblings, including half-siblings and step-siblings when the child has an established bond with the step-sibling and the step-sibling lives at least part-time with the biological parent.

(b) A secondary objective of this article is to achieve fairness between the parents.

Recently changed. Amended by Senate Bill 459, chapter 62 of the Acts of 2026, effective 11 June 2026, which added the step-sibling contact objective at (a)(8).

What the child wants

West Virginia does set an age, and it is 14. Sec. 48-9-209(f)(5)(E) lists among the things that can rebut the equal-time presumption that equal allocation would be 'Contrary to the firm and reasonable preferences of a child who is 14 years of age or older; and to accommodate, if the court determines it is in the best interests of the child, the firm and reasonable preferences of a child under 14 years of age, but sufficiently matured that he or she can intelligently express a voluntary preference for one parent.' So a 14-year-old's firm and reasonable preference carries real statutory weight, and a younger but mature child's preference can too – but neither is a veto, and the court still decides. How a child is interviewed is governed by Rule 17 of the Rules of Practice and Procedure for Family Court, which sec. 48-9-403(g) expressly cross-references for relocation cases.

Where there has been violence or abuse

W. Va. Code sec. 48-9-209, and it is a burden-shifting rule rather than a flat presumption. Sec. 48-9-209(a)(3) makes domestic violence as defined in sec. 48-27-202 one of five limiting factors the court must consider when approving or implementing any parenting plan. Sec. 48-9-209(b): if a parent, or another person regularly in that parent's household, is found to have engaged in any of those activities, 'the court shall impose limits that are reasonably calculated to protect the child or child's parent from harm,' choosing from a list that includes adjusting custodial responsibility (up to allocating exclusive custodial responsibility to the other parent), supervision, exchanges through an intermediary or in a protected setting, restraints on communication or proximity, sobriety requirements for 24 hours before and during custodial time, denial of overnights, restrictions on who may be present, a bond, and completion of an intervention program. Sec. 48-9-209(c) is the crucial one: the court 'may not allocate custodial responsibility or decision-making responsibility to that parent without making special written findings that the child and other parent can be adequately protected,' and 'the parent found to have engaged in the behavior… has the burden of proving that an allocation of custodial responsibility or decision-making responsibility to that parent will not endanger the child or the other parent.' Sec. 48-9-209(d) allows cost reimbursement where the court finds an accusation of abuse or domestic violence was knowingly false. Sec. 48-9-302(c): 'When substantial allegations of domestic abuse have been made, the court shall order an investigation under section 9-301 or make an appointment [of a guardian ad litem or a lawyer for the child], unless the court is satisfied that the information necessary to evaluate the allegations will be adequately presented to the court without such order or appointment.'

The parenting plan

Yes, and you file it yourself. W. Va. Code sec. 48-9-205(a): 'A party seeking a judicial allocation of custodial responsibility or decision-making responsibility under this article shall file a proposed parenting plan with the court. Parties may file a joint plan.' The proposed plan must be verified and must state, to the extent known or reasonably discoverable: any adults the child has lived with for a year or more (or since birth if the child is under one), with addresses and length of residence; the name and address of each parent and anyone else with standing under sec. 48-9-103; a description of the caretaking and other parenting responsibilities each of those people performed; the work and child-care schedules of anyone seeking custodial responsibility, with expected changes; the child's school and extracurricular activities; a description of any sec. 48-9-209 limiting factors, including any restraining orders by case number and jurisdiction; required financial information; and the known areas of agreement and disagreement with any other plan filed. The court must keep that information confidential where the person giving it has a reasonable fear of domestic abuse. Sec. 48-9-203 covers the temporary plan. The plan the court ultimately orders must contain a custodial schedule or a formula for one, an allocation of decision-making as to significant matters, a dispute-resolution provision, provisions for financial support, and a custody plan for National Guard, reserve or active-duty mobilization (sec. 48-9-205(c)). Forms are available from the West Virginia Judiciary's family court self-help materials.

Mediation

Yes, with mandatory pre-screening. W. Va. Code sec. 48-9-202(a)(2): 'The court shall require the parents to attend parent education classes.' Sec. 48-9-202(a)(3): 'If parents are unable to resolve issues and agree to a parenting plan, the court SHALL require mediation unless application of the procedural rules promulgated pursuant to the provisions of subsection (b) of this section indicates that mediation is inappropriate in the particular case.' Sec. 48-9-202(b) requires the Supreme Court of Appeals to promulgate premediation screening procedures to determine whether domestic violence, child abuse or neglect, acts or threats of duress or coercion, substance abuse, mental illness or similar elements 'would adversely affect the safety of a party, the ability of a party to meaningfully participate in the mediation or the capacity of a party to freely and voluntarily consent' – and while those rules 'shall not establish a per se bar to mediation,' they may be the basis for the court not to order mediation at all, or not to require face-to-face meetings with the other parent. Sec. 48-9-202(c): a mediator makes no recommendation to the court and may not reveal what a parent disclosed in confidence, except that a mediator may reveal credible information about domestic violence or child abuse. Sec. 48-9-202(d): mediation is ordered at an hourly cost reasonable in light of each parent's finances, on a uniform sliding scale, and where one parent's ability to pay is significantly greater the court may order that parent to pay some or all of the other's expenses.

If the court appoints someone to look into it

W. Va. Code sec. 48-9-301 and sec. 48-9-302, and West Virginia is unusually protective about cost. Sec. 48-9-301(a): the court may order a written investigation and report, by the guardian ad litem, court staff, or a professional social service organization experienced in counseling children and families; the court must notify all parties, identify the assigned investigator, and 'the investigator shall be a compulsory witness and subject to full examination and cross-examination by both parties.' Sec. 48-9-301(b): the investigator may consult anyone with information, but the people consulted must be identified to the parties and are subject to full discovery, including pre-hearing deposition; a child who has reached 12 must consent before being referred for diagnosis unless the court finds the child lacks capacity. Sec. 48-9-301(c): the report goes to counsel and unrepresented parties at least 10 days before the hearing, and the hearing may not happen until the report has been provided and any requested discovery is complete. Sec. 48-9-302(a)-(b): the court may appoint a guardian ad litem to represent the child's best interests, or a lawyer to represent a child competent to direct the representation, specifying the role, duties and scope in each case. Who pays – both sections say the same thing: 'Services and tests ordered under this section shall be ordered only if at no cost to the individuals involved, or at a cost that is reasonable in light of the available financial resources' (secs. 48-9-301(d) and 48-9-302(f)).

Changing the order

W. Va. Code sec. 48-9-401. Subsection (a): the court shall modify a parenting plan order if it finds, 'on the basis of facts that were not known or have arisen since the entry of the prior order and were not anticipated in the prior order, that a substantial change has occurred in the circumstances of the child or of one or both parents and a modification is necessary to serve the best interests of the child.' Subsection (b): 'In exceptional circumstances, a court may modify a parenting plan if it finds that the plan is not working as contemplated and in some specific way is manifestly harmful to the child, even if a substantial change of circumstances has not occurred.' Subsection (c) rules three things out, absent a showing of harm to the child and absent agreement: an involuntary loss of income by loss of employment or otherwise; a parent's remarriage or cohabitation (except in the circumstances in sec. 48-9-209(f)); and a legal parent's choice of reasonable caretaking arrangements, including day care. Subsection (d): the occurrence or worsening of a sec. 48-9-209(a) limiting factor after a plan is ordered IS a substantial change of circumstances, and protective measures must follow. One more, easy to miss: sec. 48-9-209(f)(2)(C) provides that a nursing child reaching one year of age 'shall qualify as a substantial change in circumstances' under sec. 48-9-401. There is no waiting period. To change an existing order, see how to modify custody and parenting time in West Virginia.

If you were never married

West Virginia's parenting-plan statute applies to parents regardless of marriage, but you have to be a legal parent to use it. Sec. 48-9-103(a)(1) gives the right to be notified of and participate as a party to 'a legal parent of the child, as defined in section 1-232 of this chapter,' along with an adult already allocated custodial or decision-making responsibility under a current parenting plan, and anyone who was a party to a prior custody and visitation order. Sec. 48-9-103(b) lets the court permit others to intervene in exceptional cases, but they cannot start an action. So an unmarried father must first be a legal parent – by acknowledgment or a paternity adjudication – before he can file for an allocation of custodial responsibility. Once he is, the equal-time presumption in sec. 48-9-102a and the joint decision-making presumption in sec. 48-9-207(b) apply to him the same as to anyone else.