Bill Text: CA SB616 | 2021-2022 | Regular Session | Amended
Bill Title: Child custody: child abuse and safety.
Spectrum: Moderate Partisan Bill (Democrat 10-2)
Status: (Engrossed - Dead) 2022-08-31 - Ordered to inactive file. [SB616 Detail]
Download: California-2021-SB616-Amended.html
|
Amended
IN
Assembly
June 20, 2022 |
|
Amended
IN
Assembly
June 02, 2022 |
|
Amended
IN
Senate
May 05, 2021 |
|
Amended
IN
Senate
March 25, 2021 |
| Introduced by Senators Rubio, Caballero, and Min (Coauthor: Senator Gonzalez) (Coauthors: Assembly Members Cristina Garcia, Gipson, and Blanca Rubio) |
February 18, 2021 |
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST
Existing law governs the determination of child custody and visitation in contested proceedings. Existing law requires the court, for purposes of deciding custody, to determine the best interests of the child based on certain factors, including the nature and amount of contact with both parents, and consistent with specified findings, including that the court’s primary concern must be to ensure the health, safety, and welfare of the child.
This bill would prohibit the penalizing of a parent for making a good faith complaint about domestic violence or child abuse, and would prohibit a court from removing a child from a parent or litigating party during a child custody proceeding in order to improve a deficient relationship with the allegedly abusive other parent
of a child if the parent or litigating party meets specified criteria. In a child custody proceeding in which a parent has been alleged to have committed domestic violence or child abuse, the bill would prohibit the admission of expert evidence from a court-appointed or outside professional relating to alleged abuse unless the expert possesses demonstrated expertise and clinical experience in working with victims of domestic violence or child abuse that is not solely of a forensic nature. The bill would require a court in a child custody proceeding in which a parent has been alleged to have committed domestic violence or child abuse to consider evidence of past sexual or physical abuse committed by the accused parent. The bill would prohibit a court in a child custody proceeding from ordering reunification treatment unless specified criteria are met. The bill would require a judicial officer who hears child custody proceedings, and other relevant court personnel involved in child custody proceedings, to
complete not less than 40 hours of initial domestic violence and child abuse training, and not less than 20 hours of ongoing domestic violence and child abuse training every 2 years. The bill would require that training to focus solely on domestic and sexual violence and child abuse and meet specified criteria.
Digest Key
Vote: MAJORITY Appropriation: NO Fiscal Committee: NO Local Program: NOBill Text
The people of the State of California do enact as follows:
SECTION 1.
This act shall be cited as “Piqui’s Law, the Safe Child Act.”SEC. 2.
(a) The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:(6)Empirical national research indicates that family courts regularly discount allegations of child physical and sexual abuse when those allegations are raised in child custody cases.
(7)Empirical national research shows that alleged or known abusive parents are often granted custody or unprotected parenting time by family courts. According to this research, approximately one-third of parents alleged to have committed child abuse took primary custody from the protective parent reporting the abuse, placing children at ongoing risk.
(8)Researchers at the Center for Judicial Excellence have documented more than 800 child murders in the United States since 2008 committed by a divorcing or separating parent. More than 100 of these child murders are known to have occurred after a court ordered the child to have contact with the dangerous parent over the objection of a safe parent or caregiver.
(9)Scientifically unsound theories that treat abuse allegations of mothers as likely false attempts to undermine fathers are frequently applied in family court to minimize or deny reports of abuse of parents and children. Many experts who testify against abuse allegations lack expertise in the relevant type of alleged abuse, relying instead on unsound and unproven theories.
(10)Judicial officers presiding over custody cases involving allegations of child abuse, child sexual abuse, and domestic violence in California are rarely required to receive comprehensive training on these subjects. It is inadequate to claim California requires training when California does not have minimum hourly requirements or strong curriculum standards to ensure the training actually meets its goals.
(2)Strengthen the abilities of courts to recognize and adjudicate domestic violence and child abuse allegations based on valid, admissible evidence, and enter orders that protect and minimize the risk of harm to children.
(3)
(a)A parent shall not be penalized for making a good faith complaint about domestic violence or child abuse. In a child custody proceeding, a court shall not remove the child from a parent or litigating party during a child custody proceeding in order to improve a deficient relationship with the allegedly abusive other parent of a child if the parent or litigating party is both of the following:
(1)Competent, protective, and not physically or sexually abusive.
(2)The person with whom the child is bonded or to whom the child is attached.
(b)In a child custody proceeding in which a parent has been alleged to have
committed domestic violence or child abuse, including child sexual abuse, expert evidence from a court-appointed or outside professional relating to the alleged abuse shall be admitted only if the professional possesses demonstrated expertise and clinical experience in working with victims of domestic violence or child abuse, including child sexual abuse, that is not solely of a forensic nature.
(c)In a child custody proceeding in which a parent has been alleged to have committed domestic violence or child abuse, including child sexual abuse, evidence of past sexual or physical abuse committed by the accused parent shall be considered, in addition to any other relevant admissible evidence, including all of the following:
(1)Any past or current protection or restraining orders against the accused parent.
(2)Arrests of the accused parent for domestic violence, sexual violence, or child abuse.
(3)Convictions of the accused parent for domestic violence, sexual violence, or child abuse.
(d)(1)In a child custody proceeding, a court shall not order a reunification treatment, unless there is scientifically valid proof of the safety, effectiveness, and therapeutic value of the reunification treatment. A court also shall not order a reunification treatment that is predicated on cutting off a child from a parent with whom the child is bonded or to whom the child is attached.
(2)An order to remediate the resistance of a child to have contact with an accused violent or abusive parent shall primarily address the behavior of that parent or the contributions of that parent to the resistance of the child before ordering the other parent of the child to take steps to potentially improve the relationship of the child with the parent with whom the child resists contact.
(3)For purposes of this subdivision, “reunification treatment” means a treatment or therapy aimed at reuniting or reestablishing a relationship between a child and an estranged, abusive, or rejected parent or other family member of the child.
(e)A judicial officer who hears child custody proceedings and other relevant court personnel involved in child custody proceedings, including special masters, minors’ counsel, parenting coordinators, custody evaluators, custody investigators, child custody recommending counsel, and custody mediators, shall be required to complete not less than 40 hours of initial domestic violence and child abuse training, and not less than 20 hours of ongoing domestic violence and child abuse
training every two years, as described.
(1)The standards required pursuant to this subdivision shall apply to any professional appointed by a court during a child custody proceeding to express an opinion relating to abuse, trauma, or the behaviors of victims and perpetrators of abuse and trauma.
(2)The standards required pursuant to this subdivision shall not count towards the “demonstrated expertise and clinical experience in working with victims of domestic violence or child abuse, including child sexual abuse, that is not solely of a forensic nature” of a professional serving as an expert witness for the purpose of complying with subdivision (b).
(3)The training program described in this subdivision is an ongoing training and education program that shall be designed to improve the ability of courts to recognize and respond to child physical abuse, child sexual abuse, domestic violence, and trauma in all family victims, particularly children, and make appropriate custody decisions that prioritize child safety and well-being and are culturally sensitive and appropriate for diverse communities. The training program shall meet all of the following requirements:
(A)Focus solely on domestic and sexual violence and child abuse, including all of the following:
(i)Child sexual abuse.
(ii)Physical abuse.
(iii)Emotional abuse.
(iv)Coercive control.
(v)Implicit and explicit bias, including biases relating to parents with disabilities.
(vi)Trauma.
(vii)Long- and short-term impacts of domestic violence and child abuse on children.
(viii)Victim and perpetrator behavior patterns and relationship dynamics within the cycle of violence.
(B)Be provided by a professional with substantial experience in assisting survivors of domestic violence or child abuse, which shall include at least one victim service provider, as defined in Section 12291 of Title 34 of the United States Code, and, if possible, a survivor of domestic violence or child physical or sexual abuse.
(C)Rely on evidence-based and peer-reviewed research by recognized experts in the types of abuse described in subparagraph (A).
(D)Not include theories, concepts, or belief systems unsupported by the research described in subparagraph (C).
(f)This section is intended to bring California into compliance with the federal Violence Against Women Act Reauthorization Act of 2022 (Division W of Public Law 117-103), and make the state eligible for additional grant funding through the United States Department of Justice’s STOP Violence Against Women Formula Grant Program, as appropriated for states that meet the requirements of that act.
