I've seen some media flurry around the Iowa "joint physical care" bill, with proponents championing the bill as codifying father's rights, but I'm not so sure it isn't a non-issue.



Iowa law currently reads:



598.41 Custody of children.

(5)(a) Joint physical care may be in the best interest of the child, but joint legal custody does not require joint physical care. When the court determines such action would be in the best interest of the child and would preserve the relationship between each parent and the child, joint physical care may be awarded to both joint custodial parents or physical care may be awarded to one joint custodial parent.



In other words, if it's in the best interest of the child and preserving the relationships between parent and child, the Court may award joint physical care to both parents. On the other hand, if it's in the best interest of the child for physical care to be awarded to one parent, the Court can do that instead.



The bill changes that to read as follows:



598.41 Custody of children.

(5)(a) If joint legal custody is awarded to both parents, the court may award joint physical care to both joint custodial parents upon the request of either parent. If the court denies the request for joint physical care, the determination shall be accompanied by specific findings of fact and conclusions of law that the awarding of joint physical care is not in the best interest of the child.



Okay, the court can still either choose to award to one parent or to both, depending on the best interests of the child. Perhaps it emphasizes joint physical care as the best solution slightly more than the prior version of the bill. But practically, the only real difference is that the court must put its reasons into the order. A thing any good judge would have done anyway, no?