Should I Call Law Enforcement for a Fender-Bender?
April 10, 2026
In Kentucky, a minor child does NOT have the unilateral ability to choose where they live, UNTIL they turn 18. As long as they are a minor, they do not get to be the ultimate decider.
There is NO magic age they can pick which parent they want to live with.
BUT, it can be a factor.
What Is Kentucky’s Standard on a Minor Child’s Preference?
In Kentucky, the Court’s use the best interest standard to decide where a child resides, and when they see both parents. There is a presumption that equal timesharing (meaning the minor child sees both parents an equal amount of time) serves the minor child’s best interest. This came as part of a major law change in 2018, explained more here.
There is a list of factors for the court to consider, and the child’s preference is a factor. It is very important to note, that the minor child’s preference is only one factor out of eleven factors.
Application of Kentucky's KRS 403.270
In Kentucky, there is the very strong presumption that equal timesharing serves the minor child’s best interest. Only if the Court decided there is sufficient proof to deviate from equal does the list of factors included in KRS 403.270 come into play.
One of those eleven factors is the child’s preference. The Court will also take into account when looking at the child’s preference:
- The child’s age
- Maturity
- Inappropriate influence or alienation by parents or outside source
KRS 403.270 Best Interest Standard in Kentucky
This statute dictates that the family Court’s decide custody based upon the best interest of the child(ren), with equal consideration to both parents and any defacto custodian. It creates the presumption that equal parenting time serves the best interest by default. If someone wants to deviate from equal timesharing, the court must construct a schedule that maximizes the time with each parent or defacto custodian and is consistent with the best interest of the child(ren).
KRS 403.270(2) The factors identified to determine the best interest of the child(ren) are:
(a) The wishes of the child's parent or parents, and any de facto custodian, as to his or her custody;
(b) The wishes of the child as to his or her custodian, with due consideration given to the influence a parent or de facto custodian may have over the child's wishes;
(c) The interaction and interrelationship of the child with his or her parent or parents, his or her siblings, and any other person who may significantly affect the child's best interests;
(d) The motivation of the adults participating in the custody proceeding;
(e) The child's adjustment and continuing proximity to his or her home, school, and community;
(f) The mental and physical health of all individuals involved;
(g) A finding by the court that domestic violence and abuse, as defined in KRS 403.720, has been committed by one (1) of the parties against a child of the parties or against another party. The court shall determine the extent to which the domestic violence and abuse has affected the child and the child's relationship to each party, with due consideration given to efforts made by a party toward the completion of any domestic violence treatment, counseling, or program;
(h) The extent to which the child has been cared for, nurtured, and supported by any de facto custodian;
(i) The intent of the parent or parents in placing the child with a de facto custodian;
(j) The circumstances under which the child was placed or allowed to remain in the custody of a de facto custodian, including whether the parent now seeking custody was previously prevented from doing so as a result of domestic violence as defined in KRS 403.720 and whether the child was placed with a de facto custodian to allow the parent now seeking custody to seek employment, work, or attend school; and
(k) The likelihood a party will allow the child frequent, meaningful, and continuing contact with the other parent or de facto custodian, except that the court shall not consider this likelihood if there is a finding that the other parent or de facto custodian engaged in domestic violence and abuse, as defined in KRS 403.720, against the party or a child and that a continuing relationship with the other parent will endanger the health or safety of either that party or the child.
A child’s preference on placement in Kentucky explained
Understanding how a child’s preference plays into a custodial case can be confusing. Because I just told you that they don’t get to choose, but it is a factor.
As a Kentucky family law practitioner, I get asked this question A LOT. Often, I explain how the child’s preference comes into play, as the Court cares a lot more why the child wants something when what they want.
Here's a more detailed explanation:
- A child may say they want to live with dad
- In one scenario it is because mom’s boyfriend puts cigarettes out on the child’s arm
- In another it is because dad’s liquor cabinet is unlocked and unsupervised
In both these scenarios the child wants to live with dad, but only in one does the child’s choice have extreme weight on the Court. In the second scenario, the child’s preference actually would weigh against placement with the parent child is processing a preference for.
In application, rarely does a child’s preference sway the Court’s decision in a case. There are many factors that have an enormous amount of weight, in the above scenarios, we also have abuse occurring in one residence, which will also be presented as a reason to modify the schedule. In the other, the child’s preference would work actively against that parent.
In Conclusion
In Kentucky, a child’s preference regarding where they live in a custody action may be considered by the court, but it is not determinative. The family court evaluates the child’s wishes as part of a broader analysis of the child’s best interests, which is the overriding standard in custody determinations. Kentucky law does not specify a particular age at which a child can definitively choose their living arrangements, but the court may give weight to the child’s preference if the child is of sufficient maturity and intelligence to make an informed decision. However, the court retains discretion to prioritize other factors if the child’s preference conflicts with their best interests.
