In Illinois, parental responsibilities are divided into two main categories:

1. Significant decision-making responsibilities (formally known as Custody: This includes authority over major life decisions such as education, healthcare, religion, and extracurricular activities.

Section 602.5 focuses specifically on the allocation of significant decision-making responsibilities.

The guiding principle behind Section 602.5 is the best interests of the child. The law recognizes that each family’s situation is unique, and the goal is to establish an arrangement that best supports the child’s development and well-being. The court assesses various factors to determine what arrangement best serves the child’s interests.

When determining the allocation of decision-making responsibilities, Illinois courts evaluate the following factors under Section 602.5(c):

1. The wishes of the child

• The court takes into account the child’s preferences, depending on their age, maturity, and ability to express reasoned opinions. The court does not automatically follow the child's wishes but weighs them appropriately against other factors.

2. The wishes of each parent

• Both parents’ preferences regarding decision-making responsibilities are considered. Each parent may propose how decision-making should be divided and whether they seek sole or shared authority over specific decisions.

3. The child's adjustment to their home, school, and community

• The court examines how well the child has adapted to their current living and school environment, social circles, and community. This factor helps the court determine if a particular arrangement would disrupt the child’s stability or emotional well-being.

4. The mental and physical health of all individuals involved

• The physical and mental health of both parents and the child are important considerations. A parent with health concerns that affect their ability to make sound decisions for the child may not be granted primary or sole decision-making authority.

5. The child's needs

• Courts look at the child’s specific developmental, emotional, educational, and physical needs, assessing whether one parent may be better suited to address these needs in decision-making responsibilities. If the child has unique requirements, such as special education or medical care, this factor becomes critical.

6. The parental responsibilities performed by each parent in the preceding two years

• This factor evaluates each parent’s historical involvement in caregiving and decision-making over the past two years (or since the child’s birth if the child is younger than two). It helps establish a pattern of which parent has been more engaged in the child’s life.

7. Any prior agreement or course of conduct between the parents relating to decision-making

• Courts consider any agreements the parents have made about decision-making in the past, even if those agreements were informal. The court may be reluctant to disrupt an arrangement that has been working well unless a compelling reason is presented.

8. The child’s interaction and relationship with their parents, siblings, and any other significant individuals

• The court looks at the quality of the child’s relationship with both parents, siblings, and other important figures, such as step-parents or grandparents. Strong, healthy relationships may favor an allocation of decision-making that maintains those bonds.

9. The distance between the parents' residences

• If the parents live far apart, it may be impractical for them to share decision-making responsibilities equally. For example, significant distance could impact a parent’s ability to participate in day-to-day decisions like attending school meetings.

10. The willingness and ability of each parent to encourage a close and continuing relationship between the other parent and the child

• Courts favor parents who demonstrate a willingness to foster a healthy relationship between the child and the other parent. A parent’s efforts to alienate the child from the other parent or interfere with visitation may negatively impact their share of decision-making authority.

11. The willingness and ability of each parent to cooperate in decision-making

• The ability of parents to communicate and cooperate effectively is critical in determining shared decision-making responsibilities. Parents who cannot work together without conflict may not be awarded joint decision-making authority.

12. Any history of violence or abuse

• If a parent has a history of domestic violence, abuse, or neglect, the court may restrict or deny their decision-making authority to protect the child. Courts are highly cautious about exposing children to environments where violence or abuse occurred.

13. The physical violence or threat of physical violence by the child's parent directed against the child

• This factor explicitly addresses instances where a parent has been violent or threatening toward the child, which would be a significant barrier to their ability to make decisions for the child's well-being.

14. The occurrence of abuse against a family or household member

• Abuse against any household member, even if not directed at the child, is taken seriously by the court when allocating parental responsibilities. This factor seeks to ensure the safety and emotional stability of the child.

15. Whether one of the parents is a sex offender

• If one parent is a registered sex offender, this can significantly influence the court’s decision regarding the allocation of decision-making responsibilities, especially if the offense involved children or vulnerable individuals.

16. The terms of a parent’s military family care plan

• If a parent is an active member of the military, the court may consider the terms of their military family care plan, particularly if the parent is subject to deployment. This could affect their ability to participate in decision-making on a regular basis.

17. Any other factor the court expressly finds to be relevant

• The court may consider any additional factors that arise during the proceedings, as long as they are relevant to the best interests of the child. This allows the court flexibility to account for unique circumstances.