NY State Senate Bill 2017-S2267

Senate Bill S2267

2017-2018 Legislative Session

Establishes the presumption in matrimonial proceedings of awarding shared parenting of minor children

download bill text pdf

Archive: Last Bill Status - In Senate Committee Children And Families Committee

Introduced
- In Committee Assembly
- In Committee Senate
- On Floor Calendar Assembly
- On Floor Calendar Senate
- Passed Assembly
- Passed Senate
Delivered to Governor
Signed By Governor

Please enter your contact information

First Name

Last Name

Email Address

A valid email address is required.

Home address is used to determine the senate district in which you reside. Your support or opposition to this bill is then shared immediately with the senator who represents you.

Optional services from the NY State Senate:

Create an account. An account allows you to officially support or oppose key legislation, sign petitions with a single click, and follow issues, committees, and bills that matter to you. When you create an account, you agree to this platform's terms of participation.

Include a custom message for your Senator? (Optional)

Enter a message to your senator. Many New Yorkers use this to share the reasoning behind their support or opposition to the bill. Others might share a personal anecdote about how the bill would affect them or people they care about.

Actions

View Actions

	Assembly Actions - Lowercase Senate Actions - UPPERCASE
Jan 03, 2018	referred to children and families
Jan 12, 2017	referred to children and families

2017-S2267 (ACTIVE) - Details

Current Committee:: Senate Children And Families
Law Section:: Domestic Relations Law
Laws Affected:: Amd §§70 & 240, add §240-d, Dom Rel L
Versions Introduced in Other Legislative Sessions:: 2009-2010: S6968
2011-2012: S4281
2013-2014: S949
2015-2016: S2375
2019-2020: S4260
2021-2022: S4667
2023-2024: S5282

2017-S2267 (ACTIVE) - Summary

Establishes the presumption in matrimonial proceedings for awarding shared parenting of minor children in the absence of an allegation that shared parenting would be detrimental to the best interests of the child; establishes an order of preference in awarding custody; defines shared parenting and parenting plan.

2017-S2267 (ACTIVE) - Sponsor Memo

                                 BILL NUMBER:  S2267

 TITLE OF BILL :

An act to amend the domestic relations law, in relation to
establishing a presumption of shared parenting of minor children in
matrimonial proceedings

 PURPOSE :

To create a statutory presumption of joint custody for all minor
children whose parents are no longer married, so that both parents can
continue to share in the responsibilities and duties of the children's
upbringing.

 SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS :

Section 1 of the bill sets forth the legislative intent for creating a
presumption of joint custody in proceedings where the custody of minor
children is at issue. It further states that continuing contact with
both parents through shared parenting is in the best interests of
minor children.

Section 2 of the bill amends § 70(a) of the Domestic Relations Law to
require the court to award custody to both parents in the absence of
allegations that shared parenting would be detrimental to the child.

The burden of proof that shared parenting would be detrimental is
placed upon the parent requesting sole custody.

Section 3 of the bill amends § 240(1)(a) of the Domestic Relations Law
to establish an order of preference for the awarding of custody of
minor children in the case of divorce. The first preference is for
joint custody to be awarded by the court. If the court opts not to
award joint custody it must state its reasons for denial. The order of
joint custody may be amended by the court if it is shown that it would
be in the best interests of the child. The second preference would be
to either parent based on the court's determination of the best
interests of the child. The third preference would be to the person
with whom the child has been living in a wholesome and stable
environment. The final preference would be to another person the court
deems suitable.

Section 4 of the bill adds a new § 240-d to the Domestic Relations Law
to create a definition of shared parenting. Under this definition both
parents would remain legally responsible and in control of their
children so that both parents share in the care and upbringing of
their children. It also sets forth the requirements of a "parenting
plan."

Section 5 of the bill is the effective date.

 EXISTING LAW :

Currently, there is no preference for shared parenting in New York.
The court may award joint custody, but in practice this is not the
case.

 JUSTIFICATION :

Regardless of whether parents are married, each should be assumed to
have equally important responsibilities in child rearing. Current
psychological studies, including state sponsored projects spanning 3B
states, reveal convergent findings that children of all ages have
better adjustment after divorce when they have full parenting
participation from both parents. Custody decisions that exclude or

narrowly limit the participation of either parent tend, ultimately, to
have negative impact on children.

According to reports by the National Institute of Mental Health,
custody arrangements which effectively remove one parent from a
child's life interferes with the child's normal development. Although
nothing in current law prohibits a court of competent jurisdiction
from awarding shared parenting of a child to both parents, it is
rarely done by the courts, or only in instances where it is requested
by both parents.

A shared parenting arrangement would allow the child to enjoy
continued contact with both parents and the extended family on each
side. Presumptive shared parenting protects and shifts the litigation
burden away from the cooperative parent, and fosters a context for
mediation to the child's advantage. Because presumptive shared
parenting reduces litigation and re-litigation, it will also reduce
the stress inherent in the divorce process. To the extent that policy
is driven by conflict reduction, shared parenting is the obvious
starting point. Joint physical custody also satisfies the top positive
predictor of child support compliance, which is involvement in
parenting. Most importantly, it recognizes that children are not
property or bargaining chips. It reassures the child that both parents
are equal. As this law would assure that neither parent is demoted in
the children's eyes, it affirms to the children what they need to
feel, that both parents are equal.

 LEGISLATIVE HISTORY :

2015-2016: S.2375A - Amended and Recommitted to Children and Families
2013-2014: S.949 - Died in Children & Families.
2011-2012: S.4281 - Died in Children and Families.
2010: S.6968 - Referred to Children and Families.

 FISCAL IMPLICATIONS :

None.

 EFFECTIVE DATE :
First of November next succeeding the date on which it shall have
become a law.

2017-S2267 (ACTIVE) - Bill Text download pdf

                            
 
                     S T A T E   O F   N E W   Y O R K
 ________________________________________________________________________
 
                                   2267
 
                        2017-2018 Regular Sessions
 
                             I N  S E N A T E
 
                             January 12, 2017
                                ___________
 
 Introduced  by  Sen.  PARKER -- read twice and ordered printed, and when
   printed to be committed to the Committee on Children and Families
 
 AN ACT to amend the domestic relations law, in relation to  establishing
   a  presumption  of  shared  parenting of minor children in matrimonial
   proceedings

   THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, REPRESENTED IN SENATE AND  ASSEM-
 BLY, DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:
 
   Section  1.  Legislative  findings.  The  legislature hereby finds and
 declares that it is the public policy of the state to assure minor chil-
 dren have frequent and continuing contact with both  parents  after  the
 parents have separated or dissolved their marriage and that it is in the
 public  interest  to encourage parents to share the rights and responsi-
 bilities of child-rearing in order to effectuate  this  policy.  At  the
 outset  and  thereafter,  in  any proceeding where there is at issue the
 custody of a minor child, the court may,  during  the  pendency  of  the
 proceeding or at any time thereafter, make such order for the custody of
 minor  children  as may seem necessary or proper. The provisions of this
 act establish a presumption, affecting the burden of proof, that  shared
 parenting is in the best interests of minor children.
   §  2.  Subdivision (a) of section 70 of the domestic relations law, as
 amended by chapter 457 of the laws  of  1988,  is  amended  to  read  as
 follows:
   (a)   Where a minor child is residing within this state, either parent
 may apply to the supreme court for a writ of habeas corpus to have  such
 minor  child  brought  before such court; and on the return thereof, the
 court, on due consideration, [may] SHALL award the natural guardianship,
 charge and custody of such child to [either parent] BOTH PARENTS, IN THE
 ABSENCE OF AN ALLEGATION THAT SUCH SHARED PARENTING WOULD BE DETRIMENTAL
 TO SUCH CHILD, for such time, under such regulations  and  restrictions,
 and  with  such  provisions and directions, as the case may require, and
 may at any time thereafter vacate or modify such order.  [In  all  cases

  EXPLANATION--Matter in ITALICS (underscored) is new; matter in brackets
                       [ ] is old law to be omitted.

                                                            LBD06687-01-7

 S. 2267                             2

 there  shall  be  no  prima  facie  right to the custody of the child in
 either parent, but the] THE BURDEN OF PROOF THAT SUCH  SHARED  PARENTING
 WOULD  BE  DETRIMENTAL TO SUCH CHILD SHALL BE UPON THE PARENT REQUESTING
 SOLE  CUSTODY.  THE  court  shall  determine solely what is for the best
 interest of the child, and what will  best  promote  [its]  THE  CHILD'S
 welfare and happiness, and make award accordingly.
   §  3.  Paragraph  (a)  of subdivision 1 of section 240 of the domestic
 relations law, as amended by chapter 567 of the laws of 2015, is amended
 to read as follows:
   (a) (I) In any action or proceeding brought (1) to annul a marriage or
 to declare the nullity of a void marriage, or (2) for a  separation,  or
 (3)  for  a  divorce, or (4) to obtain, by a writ of habeas corpus or by
 petition and order to show cause, the custody of or right to  visitation
 with  any  child  of a marriage, the court shall require verification of
 the status of any child of the marriage with  respect  to  such  child's
 custody  and support, including any prior orders, and shall enter orders
 for custody and support as, in the court's discretion, justice requires,
 having regard to the circumstances of the case  and  of  the  respective
 parties  and  to  the  best  interests  of  the child and subject to the
 provisions of subdivision one-c of this section. Where either  party  to
 an  action  concerning  custody of or a right to visitation with a child
 alleges in a sworn petition or complaint or  sworn  answer,  cross-peti-
 tion,  counterclaim  or  other  sworn responsive pleading that the other
 party has committed an act of domestic violence against the party making
 the allegation or a family or household member of either party, as  such
 family  or  household  member  is defined in article eight of the family
 court act, and such allegations are proven by  a  preponderance  of  the
 evidence,  the  court must consider the effect of such domestic violence
 upon the best interests of the child, together with such other facts and
 circumstances as the court deems relevant in making a direction pursuant
 to this section and state on the record how  such  findings,  facts  and
 circumstances  factored  into  the  direction.  If a parent makes a good
 faith allegation based on a reasonable belief supported  by  facts  that
 the child is the victim of child abuse, child neglect, or the effects of
 domestic violence, and if that parent acts lawfully and in good faith in
 response  to  that reasonable belief to protect the child or seek treat-
 ment for the child, then that parent shall not be deprived  of  custody,
 visitation  or contact with the child, or restricted in custody, visita-
 tion or contact, based solely on that belief or the  reasonable  actions
 taken  based  on that belief. If an allegation that a child is abused is
 supported by a preponderance of  the  evidence,  then  the  court  shall
 consider  such  evidence of abuse in determining the visitation arrange-
 ment that is in the best interest of the child, and the court shall  not
 place a child in the custody of a parent who presents a substantial risk
 of  harm  to that child, and shall state on the record how such findings
 were factored into the determination. Where a proceeding filed  pursuant
 to  article  ten or ten-A of the family court act is pending at the same
 time as a proceeding brought in the supreme court involving the  custody
 of,  or  right  to  visitation  with, any child of a marriage, the court
 presiding over the proceeding under article ten or ten-A of  the  family
 court  act  may  jointly  hear the dispositional hearing on the petition
 under article ten or the permanency hearing under article ten-A  of  the
 family  court act and, upon referral from the supreme court, the hearing
 to resolve the matter of custody or visitation in the proceeding pending
 in the supreme court; provided however, the court must determine custody
 or visitation in accordance with the terms of this section.

 S. 2267                             3
 
   An order directing the payment of  child  support  shall  contain  the
 social  security numbers of the named parties. [In all cases there shall
 be no prima facie right to the custody of the child  in  either  parent.
 Such]  (II)  CUSTODY  SHALL BE AWARDED IN THE FOLLOWING ORDER OF PREFER-
 ENCE, ACCORDING TO THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE CHILD:
   (1) TO BOTH PARENTS JOINTLY PURSUANT TO SECTION TWO HUNDRED FORTY-D OF
 THIS ARTICLE. IN SUCH CASES THE COURT MUST REQUIRE THE PARENTS TO SUBMIT
 A  PARENTING  PLAN  AS DEFINED IN SUBDIVISION TWO OF SECTION TWO HUNDRED
 FORTY-D OF THIS ARTICLE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CUSTODY ORDER  OR  THE
 PARENTS ACTING INDIVIDUALLY OR IN CONCERT MAY SUBMIT A CUSTODY IMPLEMEN-
 TATION  PLAN  TO  THE COURT PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A CUSTODY DECREE. THERE
 SHALL BE A PRESUMPTION, AFFECTING  THE  BURDEN  OF  PROOF,  THAT  SHARED
 PARENTING  IS  IN THE BEST INTERESTS OF A MINOR CHILD UNLESS THE PARENTS
 HAVE AGREED TO AN AWARD OF CUSTODY TO ONE PARENT OR  SO  AGREE  IN  OPEN
 COURT  AT  A  HEARING  FOR THE PURPOSE OF DETERMINING CUSTODY OF A MINOR
 CHILD OF THE MARRIAGE OR THE COURT FINDS THAT SHARED PARENTING WOULD  BE
 DETRIMENTAL  TO  A  PARTICULAR  CHILD  OF  A  SPECIFIC MARRIAGE. FOR THE
 PURPOSE OF ASSISTING THE COURT IN  MAKING  A  DETERMINATION  WHETHER  AN
 AWARD  OF  SHARED PARENTING IS APPROPRIATE, THE COURT MAY DIRECT THAT AN
 INVESTIGATION BE CONDUCTED. IF THE COURT  DECLINES  TO  ENTER  AN  ORDER
 AWARDING  SHARED  PARENTING  PURSUANT TO THIS PARAGRAPH, THE COURT SHALL
 STATE IN ITS DECISION THE REASONS FOR  DENIAL  OF  AN  AWARD  OF  SHARED
 PARENTING.  IN  JURISDICTIONS  HAVING  A  PRIVATE  OR PUBLICLY-SUPPORTED
 CONCILIATION SERVICE, THE COURT OR THE PARTIES MAY, AT ANY TIME,  PURSU-
 ANT  TO  LOCAL RULES OF COURT, CONSULT WITH THE CONCILIATION SERVICE FOR
 THE PURPOSE OF ASSISTING THE PARTIES TO FORMULATE A PLAN FOR IMPLEMENTA-
 TION OF THE CUSTODY ORDER OR TO RESOLVE ANY CONTROVERSY WHICH HAS ARISEN
 IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF A  PLAN  FOR  CUSTODY.  ANY  ORDER  FOR  SHARED
 PARENTING MAY BE MODIFIED OR TERMINATED UPON THE PETITION OF ONE OR BOTH
 PARENTS OR ON THE COURT'S OWN MOTION IF IT IS SHOWN THAT THE BEST INTER-
 ESTS  OF  THE  CHILD  REQUIRE  MODIFICATION OR TERMINATION OF THE SHARED
 PARENTING ORDER. ANY ORDER FOR  THE  CUSTODY  OF  A  MINOR  CHILD  OF  A
 MARRIAGE ENTERED BY A COURT IN THIS STATE OR IN ANY OTHER STATE, SUBJECT
 TO  JURISDICTIONAL REQUIREMENTS, MAY BE MODIFIED AT ANY TIME TO AN ORDER
 OF SHARED PARENTING IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THIS SECTION.
   (2) TO EITHER PARENT, IN WHICH CASE, THE COURT, IN MAKING AN ORDER FOR
 CUSTODY TO EITHER PARENT SHALL  CONSIDER,  AMONG  OTHER  FACTORS,  WHICH
 PARENT  IS  MORE  LIKELY  TO  ALLOW  THE  CHILD OR CHILDREN FREQUENT AND
 CONTINUING CONTACT WITH THE NONCUSTODIAL PARENT, AND SHALL NOT PREFER  A
 PARENT AS CUSTODIAN BECAUSE OF THAT PARENT'S GENDER. THE BURDEN OF PROOF
 THAT SHARED PARENTING WOULD NOT BE IN THE CHILD'S BEST INTEREST SHALL BE
 UPON  THE  PARENT  REQUESTING  SOLE CUSTODY.   NOTWITHSTANDING ANY OTHER
 PROVISION OF LAW, ACCESS TO RECORDS  AND  INFORMATION  PERTAINING  TO  A
 MINOR  CHILD,  INCLUDING  BUT  NOT LIMITED TO MEDICAL, DENTAL AND SCHOOL
 RECORDS, SHALL NOT BE DENIED TO A PARENT BECAUSE THE PARENT IS  NOT  THE
 CHILD'S CUSTODIAL PARENT.
   (3)  IF  TO NEITHER PARENT, TO THE PERSON OR PERSONS IN WHOSE HOME THE
 CHILD HAS BEEN LIVING IN A NURTURING AND STABLE ENVIRONMENT.
   (4) TO ANY OTHER PERSON OR PERSONS DEEMED BY THE COURT TO BE  SUITABLE
 AND ABLE TO PROVIDE A NURTURING AND STABLE ENVIRONMENT.
   BEFORE  THE  COURT  MAKES  ANY  ORDER  AWARDING CUSTODY TO A PERSON OR
 PERSONS OTHER THAN A PARENT WITHOUT THE CONSENT OF THE PARENTS, IT SHALL
 MAKE A FINDING THAT AN AWARD OF CUSTODY TO A PARENT WOULD BE DETRIMENTAL
 TO THE CHILD AND THE AWARD TO A NON-PARENT IS REQUIRED TO SERVE THE BEST
 INTERESTS OF THE CHILD.  ALLEGATIONS  THAT  PARENTAL  CUSTODY  WOULD  BE
 DETRIMENTAL  TO THE CHILD, OTHER THAN A STATEMENT OF THAT ULTIMATE FACT,

 S. 2267                             4

 SHALL NOT APPEAR IN THE PLEADINGS. THE COURT  MAY,  IN  ITS  DISCRETION,
 EXCLUDE THE PUBLIC FROM THE HEARING ON THIS ISSUE. THE COURT SHALL STATE
 IN  WRITING THE REASON FOR ITS DECISION AND WHY THE AWARD MADE WAS FOUND
 TO BE IN THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE CHILD. ANY direction MADE PURSUANT TO
 THIS SUBDIVISION shall make provision for child support out of the prop-
 erty  of  [either  or]  both parents. The court shall make its award for
 child support pursuant to subdivision one-b of this section. Such direc-
 tion may provide for reasonable visitation rights to the maternal and/or
 paternal grandparents of any child of the parties. Such direction as  it
 applies  to  rights of visitation with a child remanded or placed in the
 care of a person, official, agency or institution  pursuant  to  article
 ten of the family court act, or pursuant to an instrument approved under
 section three hundred fifty-eight-a of the social services law, shall be
 enforceable  pursuant  to  part eight of article ten of the family court
 act and sections three hundred fifty-eight-a and three  hundred  eighty-
 four-a of the social services law and other applicable provisions of law
 against any person having care and custody, or temporary care and custo-
 dy,  of the child. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any writ-
 ten application or motion to the court for the establishment,  modifica-
 tion  or  enforcement  of  a child support obligation for persons not in
 receipt of public assistance and care must contain either a request  for
 child  support enforcement services which would authorize the collection
 of the support  obligation  by  the  immediate  issuance  of  an  income
 execution  for  support  enforcement  as  provided  for by this chapter,
 completed in the manner specified in section one hundred eleven-g of the
 social services law; or a statement that the applicant has  applied  for
 or  is  in  receipt  of such services; or a statement that the applicant
 knows of the availability of such services, has declined  them  at  this
 time  and  where  support  enforcement  services pursuant to section one
 hundred eleven-g of the social services law have been declined that  the
 applicant  understands  that  an  income  deduction  order may be issued
 pursuant to subdivision (c) of section fifty-two  hundred  forty-two  of
 the civil practice law and rules without other child support enforcement
 services  and that payment of an administrative fee may be required. The
 court shall provide a  copy  of  any  such  request  for  child  support
 enforcement  services  to the support collection unit of the appropriate
 social services district any time it directs payments to be made to such
 support collection unit. Additionally, the  copy  of  any  such  request
 shall  be accompanied by the name, address and social security number of
 the parties; the date and place of the parties' marriage; the  name  and
 date  of birth of the child or children; and the name and address of the
 employers and income payors of the party  from  whom  child  support  is
 sought  or  from  the  party  ordered  to pay child support to the other
 party. Such direction may require the payment of a sum or sums of  money
 either directly to the custodial parent or to third persons for goods or
 services furnished for such child, or for both payments to the custodial
 parent  and  to  such  third persons; provided, however, that unless the
 party seeking or receiving child support has applied for or is receiving
 such services, the court shall not direct such payments to  be  made  to
 the  support  collection  unit,  as  established  in section one hundred
 eleven-h of the social services law. Every order directing  the  payment
 of support shall require that if either parent currently, or at any time
 in  the  future,  has  health  insurance  benefits available that may be
 extended or obtained to cover the child,  such  parent  is  required  to
 exercise  the  option  of additional coverage in favor of such child and
 execute and deliver to such person  any  forms,  notices,  documents  or

 S. 2267                             5
 
 instruments  necessary  to assure timely payment of any health insurance
 claims for such child.
   §  4.  The  domestic  relations law is amended by adding a new section
 240-d to read as follows:
   § 240-D. CUSTODY OF CHILDREN. 1.  WHERE THE COURT  CONSIDERS  AWARDING
 SHARED PARENTING PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF PARAGRAPH (A) OF SUBDIVI-
 SION  ONE  OF SECTION TWO HUNDRED FORTY OF THIS ARTICLE, "SHARED PARENT-
 ING", SHALL MEAN AN ORDER AWARDING CUSTODY OF THE CHILD TO BOTH  PARTIES
 SO  THAT BOTH PARTIES SHARE EQUALLY THE LEGAL RESPONSIBILITY AND CONTROL
 OF SUCH CHILD AND SHARE EQUALLY THE LIVING EXPERIENCE IN TIME AND  PHYS-
 ICAL  CARE  TO ASSURE FREQUENT AND CONTINUING CONTACT WITH BOTH PARTIES,
 AS THE COURT DEEMS TO BE IN THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE CHILD, TAKING INTO
 CONSIDERATION THE LOCATION AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF EACH PARTY.    THE  TERM
 "SHARED  PARENTING",  SHALL  BE  CONSIDERED INTERCHANGEABLE WITH "NEARLY
 EQUAL SHARED PARENTING". AN AWARD OF JOINT PHYSICAL  AND  LEGAL  CUSTODY
 OBLIGATES  THE  PARTIES  TO  EXCHANGE INFORMATION CONCERNING THE HEALTH,
 EDUCATION AND WELFARE OF THE MINOR CHILD, AND UNLESS  ALLOCATED,  APPOR-
 TIONED  OR DECREED, THE PARENTS OR PARTIES SHALL CONFER WITH ONE ANOTHER
 IN THE EXERCISE OF DECISION-MAKING RIGHTS, RESPONSIBILITIES AND AUTHORI-
 TY.
   2. FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS ARTICLE A "PARENTING PLAN", REQUIRED TO BE
 SUBMITTED TO THE COURT PURSUANT TO CLAUSE ONE OF  SUBPARAGRAPH  (II)  OF
 PARAGRAPH  (A)  OF  SUBDIVISION ONE OF SECTION TWO HUNDRED FORTY OF THIS
 ARTICLE, SHALL INCLUDE BUT NOT BE LIMITED TO:
   (A) THE LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES OF EACH PARENT;
   (B) A WEEKLY PARENTING SCHEDULE;
   (C) A HOLIDAY AND VACATION PARENTING SCHEDULE;
   (D) A SCHEDULE FOR SPECIAL OCCASIONS, INCLUDING BIRTHDAYS;
   (E) A DESCRIPTION OF ANY  SPECIFIC  DECISION  MAKING  AREAS  FOR  EACH
 PARENT  PROVIDED,  HOWEVER,  THAT  BOTH PARENTS SHALL CONFER AND JOINTLY
 DETERMINE MAJOR ISSUES AFFECTING THE  WELFARE  OF  THE  CHILD  INCLUDING
 HEALTH, EDUCATION, DISCIPLINE AND RELIGION;
   (F)  IF APPLICABLE, THE NEED FOR ANY AND ALL OF THE PARTIES TO PARTIC-
 IPATE IN COUNSELING;
   (G) ANY RESTRICTIONS ON EITHER PARENT WHEN IN PHYSICAL CONTROL OF  THE
 CHILD OR CHILDREN; AND
   (H) PROVISIONS FOR MEDIATION OF DISPUTES.
   3. ONE PARENT MAY BE DESIGNATED AS A PUBLIC WELFARE RECIPIENT IN SITU-
 ATIONS WHERE PUBLIC WELFARE AID IS DEEMED NECESSARY AND APPROPRIATE.  IN
 MAKING  AN  ORDER OF SHARED PARENTING, THE COURT SHALL SPECIFY THE RIGHT
 OF EACH PARENT TO THE PHYSICAL CONTROL OF THE CHILD IN SUFFICIENT DETAIL
 TO ENABLE A PARENT DEPRIVED OF THAT CONTROL TO ENFORCE THE  COURT  ORDER
 AND  TO  ENABLE LAW ENFORCEMENT AUTHORITIES TO IMPLEMENT LAWS FOR RELIEF
 OF PARENTAL KIDNAPPING AND CUSTODIAL INTERFERENCE.
   § 5. This act shall take effect on the first of November next succeed-
 ing the date on which it shall have become a  law  and  shall  apply  to
 actions and proceedings commenced on and after such date.

Comments

Open Legislation is a forum for New York State legislation. All comments are subject to review and community moderation is encouraged.

Comments deemed off-topic, commercial, campaign-related, self-promotional; or that contain profanity, hate or toxic speech; or that link to sites outside of the nysenate.gov domain are not permitted, and will not be published. Attempts to intimidate and silence contributors or deliberately deceive the public, including excessive or extraneous posting/posts, or coordinated activity, are prohibited and may result in the temporary or permanent banning of the user. Comment moderation is generally performed Monday through Friday. By contributing or voting you agree to the Terms of Participation and verify you are over 13.

Create an account. An account allows you to sign petitions with a single click, officially support or oppose key legislation, and follow issues, committees, and bills that matter to you. When you create an account, you agree to this platform's terms of participation.