Travel, custody and relocation in Wisconsin

The passport rules are federal and read the same everywhere. This page is the other layer — what Wisconsin law and Wisconsin’s own court forms say about taking your child on a trip, moving, and who holds the passport between journeys.

Which court decides — and why a trip does not change it

Wisconsin custody jurisdiction sits under Wis. Stat. ch. 822 (§§ 822.01 et seq.), “Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act”. The home-state definition is at Wis. Stat. § 822.02(7) – “‘Home state’ means the state in which a child lived with a parent or a person acting as a parent for at least 6 consecutive months immediately before the commencement of a child custody proceeding. In the case of a child less than 6 months of age, [the term means] the state in which the child lived from birth with any of the persons mentioned. A period of temporary absence of any of the mentioned persons is part of the period.”. The practical point for travel is this: a child’s home state is where they lived for six consecutive months before a case started, and a temporary absence counts toward that period. A summer with grandparents in another state does not start a clock there, and it does not let the other parent file somewhere new.

Abduction-prevention powers

Wisconsin has not enacted the Uniform Child Abduction Prevention Act. Wisconsin has not enacted the Uniform Child Abduction Prevention Act. It does not appear among the 21 enacting jurisdictions in the Uniform Law Commission’s own enactment data, and there is no UCAPA chapter in the Wisconsin Statutes. Wisconsin therefore has no statutory abduction-prevention order with itinerary, travel-document or passport-surrender provisions; abduction-risk relief must come through custody and placement orders under Wis. Stat. § 767.41 or through the criminal interference-with-custody statute, Wis. Stat. § 948.31.

Moving, and how much warning you owe

The primary route is a MOTION, not a notice. § 767.481(1)(a): “Except as provided in par. (d), if the court grants any periods of physical placement with a child to both parents and one parent intends to relocate and reside with the child 100 driving miles or more from the other parent, the parent who intends to relocate and reside with the child shall file a motion with the court seeking permission for the child’s relocation.” § 767.481(1)(b) requires the motion to include a relocation plan stating “a. The date of the proposed relocation. b. The municipality and state of the proposed new residence. c. The reason for the relocation. d. If applicable, a proposed new placement schedule, including placement during the school year, summers, and holidays. e. The proposed responsibility and allocation of costs for each parent for transportation of the child between the parties under any proposed new placement schedule”; plus any request to change legal custody; notice that an objecting parent “must file and serve, no later than 5 days before the initial hearing, an objection to the relocation and any alternate proposal”; and “[a]n attached ‘Objection to Relocation’ form, furnished by the court.” § 767.481(1)(c) requires service by mail on the other parent at the most recent address on file (and at any other address the mover actually knows of). THE 60-DAY NOTICE IS THE EXCEPTION, not THE RULE – § 767.481(1)(d): “The requirement to file a motion under par. (a) does not apply if the child’s parents already live more than 100 driving miles apart when a parent proposes to relocate and reside with the child. If the parents already live more than 100 driving miles apart, the parent who intends to relocate with the child shall serve written notice of his or her intent to relocate on the other parent at least 60 days before relocation. Such written notice shall include the date on which the parent intends to relocate and the parent’s new address.” § 767.481(2)(a): the court schedules an initial hearing within 30 days of filing and “[t]he child may not be relocated pending the initial hearing.” § 767.481(2)(b): if the other parent was properly served and does not appear, or appears and does not object, the court approves the plan “unless the court finds that the proposed relocation plan is not in the best interest of the child.” On objection, § 767.481(2)(c) requires a written statement of the basis within 5 business days, referral to mediation unless it would cause undue hardship or endanger a party, appointment of a guardian ad litem, and a further hearing within 60 days. § 767.481(3) allows a temporary order permitting relocation before the final hearing if it is in the child’s “immediate best interest,” subject to revision, with de novo review of a court commissioner’s ruling on motion filed within 10 days. Standards – § 767.481(4)(a): “If the proposed relocation only minimally changes or affects the current placement schedule or does not affect or change the current placement schedule, the court shall approve the proposed relocation, set a new placement schedule if appropriate, and allocate the costs of and responsibility for transportation.” Otherwise § 767.481(4)(b) applies the § 767.41(5) best-interest factors plus two presumptions favoring the relocating parent – where the objecting parent “has not significantly exercised court-ordered physical placement,” and where “the parent’s relocation is related to abuse… of the child; a pattern or serious incident of interspousal battery…; or a pattern or serious incident of domestic abuse.” § 767.481(4)(d): “The movant bears the burden of proof in a contested relocation motion… except in cases involving a presumption under par. (b) 2. or 3. or (c) 2. or 3.,” in which case the objecting parent bears the burden of showing the move is not in the child’s best interest. § 767.481(5) allows the parties to stipulate to a relocation of more than 100 driving miles, which the court incorporates unless it finds the modification is not in the child’s best interest.

Relocation and vacation are different questions, and orders often treat them in the same paragraph. A trip is temporary; a move changes the child’s residence. Read your own order for which one your plan actually is before you assume the relocation rule does not apply.

What the standard order says about travel

Wisconsin publishes a statewide parenting form or guideline — Form FA-4147V, “Proposed Parenting Plan” (rev. 03/2026), the statewide Wisconsin Court System form prescribed under Wis. Stat. § 767.41(1m); it carries the legend “This form shall not be modified. It may be supplemented with additional material.” Wisconsin has no statewide default placement schedule – the form itself points instead to the “County standard placement schedule” as an option, so the operative default schedule is a county one.. That matters, because its default wording is what lands in a lot of orders unchanged, and it is where your travel terms probably came from.

Almost nothing. The statutory content list at Wis. Stat. § 767.41(1m) requires a proposed parenting plan to address, among other things, “(b) Where the parent lives currently and where the parent intends to live during the next 2 years,” “(j) How the holidays will be divided,” “(k) What the child’s summer schedule will be,” and “(L) Whether and how the child will be able to contact the other parent when the child has physical placement with the parent providing the parenting plan.” On the form, section C (“Summer and Holiday Placement Schedule”) is a grid of named holidays plus “School Spring Break,” “School Teacher Conventions” and “Summer Break to be shared as follows,” with alternatives to adopt the “County standard placement schedule” or write in another. The words “passport,” “itinerary” and “vacation” do not appear in the form at all; “travel” appears only in the variable-expenses list (“costs of college search – application fees, travel expenses” and “club/traveling team sports membership fees”). There is no advance-notice period for travel, no itinerary duty, no out-of-state or out-of-country travel clause and no passport provision. Note also that § 767.41(1m) protects a battered parent from having to disclose a specific address in the plan.

Who holds the passport

Nothing in Wisconsin’s statutes or standard forms addresses who holds the child’s passport. That is not a gap you have to live with — it is a clause you can ask for, and the federal rules above are the reason to.

What catches people out in Wisconsin

Sources for this page

• Custody jurisdiction statute: https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/statutes/statutes/822.pdf
• Abduction Prevention Act: https://www.uniformlaws.org/committees/community-home?CommunityKey=c8a53ebd-d5aa-4805-95b2-5d6f2a648b2a
• Relocation rule: https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/statutes/statutes/767.pdf
• Statewide parenting form: https://www.wicourts.gov/formdisplay/FA-4147V.pdf?formNumber=FA-4147V&formType=Form&formatId=2&language=en

Every fact above is taken from the source linked beside it. Where a figure could not be confirmed from an official source, this page says so rather than printing a plausible number. Found an error? Tell us — it goes on the corrections page with the date.

Every state