Father alleged a substantial change in circumstances, specifically sexual molestation and neglect of the children. At the time of father's motion in the Oregon court, both parents and children lived in Montana, both parents worked in Montana, and the older of the parties' two children was enrolled in a Montana school. In determining if it is an inconvenient forum, the court shall consider if it is in the interest of the child that another state assume jurisdiction. If the court finds that it is an inconvenient forum and that a court of another state is a more appropriate forum, it may dismiss the proceedings, or it may stay the proceedings upon condition that a custody proceeding be promptly commenced in another named state or upon any other conditions which may be just and proper, including the condition that a moving party stipulate consent and submission to the jurisdiction of the other forum. The court may decline to exercise its jurisdiction under ORS 109.700 to ORS 109.930 if a custody determination is incidental to an action for divorce or another proceeding while retaining jurisdiction over the divorce or other proceeding.
Payment is to be made to the clerk of the court for remittance to the proper party.
Any communication received from another state informing this state of a finding of inconvenient forum because a court of this state is the more appropriate forum shall be filed in the custody registry of the appropriate court. Upon assuming jurisdiction the court of this state shall inform the original court of this fact. Father first assigns error to the trial court's determination to decline to take jurisdiction to modify custody of the parties' children. Because father asserted the applicability of the PKPA in circuit court, we conclude that the circuit court should have inquired into the applicability of the statute. We make that inquiry on our de novo review of the record and conclude that the PKPA does not require the relief father requests.