Shared custody law in Germany (Wechselmodell): what the rules say in 2026

German law has no presumption of equal or shared care, and no statutory default model at all. Where separated parents cannot agree, the decision belongs to the Familiengericht, the family division of the local Amtsgericht, which must make the order that best serves that individual child's welfare. Joint parental responsibility, gemeinsame elterliche Sorge, normally continues after a separation and ends only if a court transfers it to one parent — but no provision of the Civil Code (BGB) prescribes how the child's time is divided, and the Code never uses the word Wechselmodell.

What has moved is case law, not statute. The Bundesgerichtshof (BGH), the court of final appeal in civil matters, has held that a court may order an even split — a paritätisches Wechselmodell — over one parent's objection, but that it presupposes parents who can already cooperate, and is as a rule refused where their relationship is significantly conflict-laden. A reform bill, the Kindschaftsrechtsmodernisierungsgesetz (KiMoG), would name the care models in the BGB for the first time without giving any of them priority; at 27 September 2026 it is a ministerial draft, not law.

What German law says about custody and care time

Two questions hide inside the English word “custody”, and German law keeps them apart.

Under § 1626 BGB, parental responsibility (elterliche Sorge) is both a duty and a right of the parents to care for their minor child, covering the child's person and property, and the same section states that contact with both parents is, as a rule, part of the child's welfare. Parents who hold it jointly must exercise it by mutual agreement (§ 1627 BGB), and separation does not end it: either may apply under § 1671 BGB for sole responsibility, granted where the other consents (unless a child of 14 or over objects) or where ending joint responsibility is expected to best serve the child. Unmarried parents start elsewhere — under § 1626a BGB responsibility is joint only on declarations of parental responsibility (Sorgeerklärungen), marriage, or a court award; otherwise the mother holds it.

Contact (Umgang) is where care time lives. § 1684 BGB gives the child a right to contact with each parent, makes each parent entitled and obliged to have it, and lets the family court decide the extent of that right. § 1687 BGB divides decisions while the parents live apart: matters of substantial significance need both parents' agreement, the parent with whom the child habitually resides decides everyday matters alone, and the other decides matters of actual care while the child is there.

No provision prescribes a model. Under § 1697a BGB the court makes the decision that, taking account of the actual circumstances and possibilities and of the legitimate interests of those involved, best serves the child's welfare. The federal justice ministry says the same of current law: child law “prescribes no fixed care model”.

Sources: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [15], [16]

How courts decide whether to order shared care

There is no statutory checklist. The criteria come from the Bundesgerichtshof, applying the welfare standard of § 1697a BGB through the court's power under § 1684 (3) BGB to set the extent of contact. German practice works from BGH XII ZB 601/15 of 1 February 2017:

• An order resulting in equal care — a paritätisches Wechselmodell — is not excluded by the statute, and one parent's rejection does not by itself bar it; the decisive standard is the child's welfare in the individual case.
• Such an order presupposes an existing ability to communicate and cooperate; ordering one to bring that ability about does not serve the child's welfare.
• Where the relationship is significantly conflict-laden, such an order is as a rule not in the child's well-understood interest.
• The court must investigate comprehensively which form of contact best serves the child's welfare, which as a rule also requires hearing the child in person.

Two newer decisions settle where the argument belongs. In May 2026 the BGH held that a dispute about care shares between jointly entitled parents belongs in the contact proceeding, so the sole right to determine residence (Aufenthaltsbestimmungsrecht) need not be transferred. In December 2025 it confirmed that such an order may reverse the care shares altogether, changing where the child's life is centred.

Whether an arrangement counts as “roughly half” is not a percentage test but a question for the trial judge: whether main responsibility can still be located with either parent, time carrying only indicative weight. In April 2026 eight of fourteen overnights left the centre of care with one parent — those facts, not a threshold. The percentage brackets that circulate (70, 67 or 60 %) come from an unadopted maintenance discussion draft.

The KiMoG draft would add a statutory list of considerations for contact decisions — relationship quality, the cooperation the arrangement needs, the child's wishes, continuity, the distance between households, the parents' working hours and any other welfare-relevant circumstance — but that list is in a draft, not in force.

Sources: [5], [7], [10], [12], [13], [14], [15], [18]

Shared care in practice: schedules, numbers and money

Parents use a vocabulary the statute does not. On its own, Wechselmodell normally means the even version, which families call “Woche-Woche” or “7-7”. The ministry's memorandum maps the three patterns onto those names: caring alone or overwhelmingly is the Residenzmodell; substantial care by both, short of half, is an asymmetrisches Wechselmodell; half or nearly half is the symmetrisches or paritätisches Wechselmodell. The alternating weeks and 50/50 schedule guides show those patterns on a calendar; shared custody terms worldwide sets the German words beside their equivalents elsewhere.

How many German families share care is not known. There is no official statistic, and the justice ministry states in its own maintenance draft that the number practising a symmetrical or asymmetrical Wechselmodell cannot be reliably determined. What is published is divorce data: in 2025 around 130,100 marriages were dissolved by court order, minor children were involved in 51.7 % of them, and about 113,400 minors were affected. Those figures count married couples only.

Money follows the care pattern rather than deciding it. In a Wechselmodell both parents are in principle liable for cash maintenance, the need is measured on both incomes and covers the extra costs the model causes, and Kindergeld is credited half against it. Short of that, § 1606 (3) sentence 2 BGB as a rule frees the mainly caring parent from any cash liability. The Düsseldorfer Tabelle practitioners quote has no force of law: the only statutory figure is the minimum maintenance set by regulation.

Sources: [9], [11], [12], [15], [18], [20], [21], [22]

German custody terms, in plain English

German term	What it means
elterliche Sorge (everyday: Sorgerecht)	Parental responsibility under § 1626 BGB: authority over the child's person and property, not a statement about where the child sleeps. Held jointly, gemeinsame Sorge; transferred under § 1671 BGB, Alleinsorge.
Umgang / Umgangsrecht	Contact: the child's right, and each parent's right and duty (§ 1684 BGB). Since the 2017 and 2026 BGH decisions, also where care time is divided.
Wechselmodell	Shared care alternating between the households. Paritätisch or symmetrisch is half or nearly half each; asymmetrisch is substantial care by both, but not half.
Residenzmodell	One parent cares alone or overwhelmingly, the other has contact. A term of practice, not of the current Code.
Kindeswohl	The child's welfare: the operative standard under § 1697a BGB.
Aufenthaltsbestimmungsrecht	The part of parental responsibility fixing where the child lives. Per BGH XII ZB 404/25 it need not be transferred where only care shares are disputed. More in the custody glossary.

Sources: [1], [4], [5], [7], [10], [14], [15]

Recent changes

• 13 May 2026 Court ruling (binding)

  BGH XII ZB 404/25: care shares are decided as contact

  A dispute between jointly entitled parents about their care shares is decided in the contact proceeding, even where it settles the child's centre of life; no transfer of the sole right to determine residence is called for.

  Official source: Bundesgerichtshof — XII ZB 404/25

• 11 May 2026 Referentenentwurf (ministerial draft) — not law

  KiMoG draft would name the three care models

  The draft would name the models — one parent caring alone or overwhelmingly, both caring to substantial extents, or both caring half or nearly half (§ 1683 (3) BGB-E) — without giving any of them priority, and would let each parent decide everyday matters alone during their own care period (§ 1645 BGB-E). Contact could also be restricted where a parent has committed domestic violence against the other. Comments were invited until 10 July 2026; the draft has not been adopted by cabinet.

  Official source: BMJV — Referentenentwurf KiMoG (PDF)

• 15 April 2026 Court ruling (binding)

  BGH XII ZB 415/25: extended contact does not split the maintenance

  § 1606 (3) sentence 2 BGB as a rule frees the mainly caring parent from cash maintenance, so no pro-rata share can be imposed even where the other parent's contact is substantially extended. The payer may instead move down Düsseldorfer-Tabelle income groups, with typically 10 % (at most 15 %) off.

  Official source: Bundesgerichtshof — XII ZB 415/25

• 1 January 2026 In force (regulation and guideline)

  2026 minimum maintenance and Düsseldorfer Tabelle

  Statutory minimum child maintenance rises to €486 a month for ages 0–5, €558 for 6–11 and €653 for 12–17. The Düsseldorfer Tabelle 2026 takes effect alongside it, as a guideline with no force of law.

  Official source: Mindestunterhaltsverordnung — gesetze-im-internet.de

Frequently asked questions

Sources