NY State Senate Bill 2017-S2577

Senate Bill S2577

2017-2018 Legislative Session

Establishes a presumption of shared parenting of minor children in matrimonial and family court proceedings

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 13, 2017	referred to children and families

co-Sponsors

2017-S2577 (ACTIVE) - Details

Current Committee:: Senate Children And Families
Law Section:: Domestic Relations Law
Laws Affected:: Amd §§70 & 240, add §240-d, Dom Rel L; add §§654 & 654-a, Fam Ct Act
Versions Introduced in Other Legislative Sessions:: 2011-2012: S5206
2013-2014: S5316
2015-2016: S2382
2019-2020: S2916
2021-2022: S2576

2017-S2577 (ACTIVE) - Summary

Establishes a presumption of shared parenting of minor children in matrimonial and family court proceedings.

2017-S2577 (ACTIVE) - Sponsor Memo

                                 BILL NUMBER:  S2577

 TITLE OF BILL :  An act to amend the domestic relations law and the
family court act, in relation to establishing a presumption of shared
parenting of minor children in matrimonial and family court
proceedings

 PURPOSE :

To create a statutory presumption of joint custody for all minor
children whose parents are no longer together, 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) 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 requirements of a "parenting plan."

Section 5 of the bill adds a new § 654 to the Family Court Act to
establish an order of preference for awarding custody of a minor. 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 6 of the bill adds a new § 654(a) to the Family Court Act 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 requirements of a "parenting plan."

Section 7 of the bill makes these changes effective immediately upon
enactment.
 EXISTING LAW :

Currently, there is no preference for shared parenting in New York.
The court may award joint custody, but in practice rarely does so.

 JUSTIFICATION :

Whether the parents are married or not, each should be assumed to have
equally important responsibilities in child rearing. In families where
parents are no longer together, as in households where the parents
live together, the social attitude concerning the alleged primacy of
maternal influence in the lives of children is an unbalanced
perspective and is potentially damaging to children.  Current
psychological studies, including state sponsored projects spanning 38
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. Statistics have shown that in more than 95% of
divorce or separation cases, the mother was awarded sole custody of
the child, with the father limited to rights of visitation.

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 child custody 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.

 FISCAL IMPLICATIONS :

None.

 EFFECTIVE DATE :
This act shall take effect November first next succeeding the date on
which it shall have become a law and shall apply to actions and
proceedings commenced on and after such date.

2017-S2577 (ACTIVE) - Bill Text download pdf

                            
 
                     S T A T E   O F   N E W   Y O R K
 ________________________________________________________________________
 
                                   2577
 
                        2017-2018 Regular Sessions
 
                             I N  S E N A T E
 
                             January 13, 2017
                                ___________
 
 Introduced  by  Sen. HELMING -- 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 and the family court act,  in
   relation  to  establishing  a presumption of shared parenting of minor
   children in matrimonial and family court 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.

                                                            LBD04768-01-7

 S. 2577                             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. 2577                             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 direction]
   (II)  CUSTODY  SHALL  BE AWARDED IN THE FOLLOWING ORDER OF PREFERENCE,
 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 THE COURT, CONSULT WITH THE  CONCILIATION  SERVICE
 FOR  THE PURPOSE OF ASSISTING THE PARTIES TO FORMULATE A PLAN FOR IMPLE-
 MENTATION 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

 S. 2577                             4
 
 DETRIMENTAL  TO THE CHILD, OTHER THAN A STATEMENT OF THAT ULTIMATE FACT,
 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

 S. 2577                             5
 
 execute  and  deliver  to  such  person any forms, notices, documents or
 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. The family court act is amended by adding a new  section  654  to
 read as follows:
   § 654. ORDER OF PREFERENCE OF CUSTODY AWARDS. CUSTODY SHALL BE AWARDED
 IN THE FOLLOWING ORDER OF PREFERENCE, ACCORDING TO THE BEST INTERESTS OF
 THE CHILD:
   (A)  TO BOTH PARENTS JOINTLY. IN SUCH CASES THE COURT MUST REQUIRE THE
 PARENTS TO SUBMIT A PARENTING PLAN AS  DEFINED  IN  SUBDIVISION  (B)  OF
 SECTION  SIX HUNDRED FIFTY-FOUR-A OF THIS PART FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE
 CUSTODY ORDER OR THE PARENTS  ACTING  INDIVIDUALLY  OR  IN  CONCERT  MAY
 SUBMIT A CUSTODY IMPLEMENTATION PLAN TO THE COURT PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A
 CUSTODY  DECREE.  THERE  SHALL BE A PRESUMPTION, AFFECTING THE BURDEN OF

 S. 2577                             6
 
 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 DETERMI-
 NATION 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 SUBDIVISION,
 THE COURT SHALL STATE IN ITS DECISION THE REASONS FOR DENIAL OF AN AWARD
 OF SHARED PARENTING. IN JURISDICTIONS HAVING A PRIVATE OR  PUBLICLY-SUP-
 PORTED  CONCILIATION SERVICE, THE COURT OR THE PARTIES MAY, AT ANY TIME,
 PURSUANT TO LOCAL RULES OF COURT, CONSULT WITH THE CONCILIATION  SERVICE
 FOR  THE PURPOSE OF ASSISTING THE PARTIES TO FORMULATE A PLAN FOR IMPLE-
 MENTATION 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 THE 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.
   (B) 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.
   (C)  IF  TO NEITHER PARENT, TO THE PERSON OR PERSONS IN WHOSE HOME THE
 CHILD HAS BEEN LIVING IN A NURTURING AND STABLE ENVIRONMENT.
   (D) 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 THE ULTIMATE FACT, 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.
   § 6. The family court act is amended by adding a new section 654-a  to
 read as follows:
   §  654-A. CUSTODY OF CHILDREN.  (A) WHERE THE COURT CONSIDERS AWARDING
 SHARED PARENTING PURSUANT  TO  THE  PROVISIONS  OF  SUBDIVISION  (A)  OF
 SECTION  SIX  HUNDRED FIFTY-FOUR OF THIS PART, "SHARED PARENTING", 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  PHYSICAL  CARE  TO

 S. 2577                             7
 
 ASSURE  FREQUENT  AND CONTINUING CONTACT WITH BOTH PARTIES, AS THE COURT
 DEEMS TO BE IN THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE CHILD,  TAKING  INTO  CONSIDER-
 ATION  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  OBLI-
 GATES  THE PARTIES TO EXCHANGE INFORMATION CONCERNING THE HEALTH, EDUCA-
 TION AND WELFARE OF THE MINOR CHILD, AND UNLESS  ALLOCATED,  APPORTIONED
 OR  DECREED, THE PARENTS OR PARTIES SHALL CONFER WITH ONE ANOTHER IN THE
 EXERCISE OF DECISION-MAKING RIGHTS, RESPONSIBILITIES AND AUTHORITY.
   (B) FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS PART A "PARENTING PLAN", REQUIRED  TO  BE
 SUBMITTED TO THE COURT, SHALL INCLUDE BUT NOT BE LIMITED TO:
   1. THE LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES OF EACH PARENT;
   2. A WEEKLY PARENTING SCHEDULE;
   3. A HOLIDAY AND VACATION PARENTING SCHEDULE;
   4. A SCHEDULE FOR SPECIAL OCCASIONS, INCLUDING BIRTHDAYS;
   5. 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, EDUCA-
 TION, DISCIPLINE AND RELIGION;
   6. IF APPLICABLE, THE NEED FOR ANY AND ALL OF THE PARTIES  TO  PARTIC-
 IPATE IN COUNSELING;
   7.  ANY  RESTRICTIONS ON EITHER PARENT WHEN IN PHYSICAL CONTROL OF THE
 CHILD OR CHILDREN; AND
   8. PROVISIONS FOR MEDIATION OF DISPUTES.
   (C) ONE PARENT MAY BE DESIGNATED AS  A  PUBLIC  WELFARE  RECIPIENT  IN
 SITUATIONS 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.
   § 7. 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.

Senate Bill S2577

Share this bill

Sponsored By

Pamela Helming