Bill > A1516

Introduced Session

This bill provides a rebuttable presumption that awarding child custody or visitations rights in favor of a parent is not in best interests of a child if there is evidence of an alleged incident of domestic violence, sexual assault, sexual contact, or endangering the welfare of a child, caused by that parent, regardless of whether a cause of action has been brought or currently is pending in court. The bill also expands the list of factors taken into account by the court in child custody determinations. In addition, the bill adds coercive control to the definition of domestic violence. Under section 1 of P.L.1995, c.55 (C.9:2-4.1), a person convicted of sexual assault, criminal sexual contact, or endangering the welfare of a child is not to be awarded the custody of or visitation rights to any minor child, except upon a showing by clear and convincing evidence that it is in the best interest of the child for custody or visitation rights to be awarded. This bill amends this statute to provide that there would be a rebuttable presumption that custody or visitation rights of one parent is not in the best interests of the child if there is clear and convincing evidence that: (1) a parent or child has reasonable cause to believe they are in imminent danger of becoming a victim of domestic violence or an abused or neglected child, caused by the other parent; or (2) there is alleged domestic violence, sexual assault, sexual contact, or endangering the welfare of a child, caused by the other parent, regardless of whether a cause of action has been brought or is currently pending in court. A parent may rebut the presumption that custody or visitation rights is not in the best interests of the child upon a specific finding in writing by the court that the parent does not pose a significant risk of harm to the child and that custody or visitation rights of that parent is in the best interests of the child. If the presumption is not rebutted after the offending parent is advised by the court that the presumption exists, custody or visitation rights are not to be granted to the offending parent. Under current law, the court makes child custody determinations by applying various statutory factors, such as the history of domestic violence and the safety of the child and the safety of either parent from physical abuse by the other parent, with the best interests of the child as the primary concern. This bill amends N.J.S.9:2-4 to provide that the court take into account the "physical and emotional" safety of the child including, but not limited to, whether the child has expressed or exhibited behavior that suggests that the child fears for his or her safety or well-being while being in the care of the other parent. The court also is required to consider as a factor clear and convincing evidence that a parent has an improper motive for seeking custody and whether the motive will negatively interfere with that parent's ability to safely and effectively share responsibilities. This bill also adds "coercive control" to the definition of domestic violence. The "Prevention of Domestic Violence Act of 1991," P.L.1991, c.261 (C.2C:25-17 et al.) defines "domestic violence" as the occurrence of one or more of the enumerated acts set forth in section 3 of P.L.1991, c.261 (C.2C:25-19) upon a person protected under the act. The bill defines "coercive control" as a pattern of threatening, humiliating, or intimidating actions by an adult or unemancipated minor, which are used to harm, punish, or frighten a person protected under this act and make the protected person dependent on that adult or unemancipated minor by isolating, exploiting, or regulating the protected person. The term includes, but is not limited to: (a) isolating the person from their friends or family; (b) controlling the amount of money accessible to the person and how the person spends such money; (c) monitoring the person's activities, communications, or movements; (d) frequently engaging in conduct meant to demean, degrade, dehumanize, or embarrass the person; (e) threatening to cause physical harm to or kill a child or relative of the person; (f) threatening to publish false information or make false reports to a law enforcement officer or other law enforcement personnel about the person; (g) damaging the person's property, household goods, or personal effects; and (h) forcing the person to participate in criminal activity. This bill is modeled upon a Florida law entitled "Greyson's Law."

AI Summary

Committee Categories

Vicky Flynn (R)*,  Gerry Scharfenberger (R)*, 

Introduced, Referred to Assembly Judiciary Committee (on 01/09/2024)

Official Document