84R11318 JSC-D

 

 

By:  Peņa                                                                                                                       H.B. No. 2363

 

 

A BILL TO BE ENTITLED

AN ACT

relating to equal parenting orders in suits affecting the parent-child relationship.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS:

SECTION 1.  Section 153.001(a), Family Code, is amended to read as follows:

(a)  The public policy of this state is to:

(1)  assure that children will have frequent and continuing contact with parents who have shown the ability to act in the best interest of the child;

(2)  provide a safe, stable, and nonviolent environment for the child;  and

(3)  encourage parents to share equally in the rights and duties of raising their child after the parents have separated or dissolved their marriage.

SECTION 2.  Section 153.134, Family Code, is amended by adding Subsection (c) to read as follows:

(c)  If the court renders an order appointing the parents joint managing conservators under this section, the court shall enter a possession order under Subchapter F-1 that provides for equal parenting, unless the court determines that[1] order is not in the best interest of the child[2], in which case the court may enter:

(1)  a standard possession order as provided by Subchapter F; or[3]

(2)  another order regarding possession that the court determines is in the best interest of the child.[4]

SECTION 3.  Chapter 153, Family Code, is amended by adding Subchapter F-1 to read as follows:

SUBCHAPTER F-1.  EQUAL PARENTING ORDER

Sec. 153.351.  AUTHORITY TO ENTER EQUAL PARENTING ORDER.  Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, a court shall, as an alternative to the standard possession order under Subchapter F, enter an order providing for periods of possession of a child in accordance with this subchapter if the court:

(1)  appoints the parents joint managing conservators under Section 153.134; and

(2)  determines that the order would be in the best interest of the child[5].

Sec. 153.352.  PERIODS OF POSSESSION UNDER EQUAL PARENTING ORDER.  (a)  Subject to Subsection (b), a court may enter an order under this subchapter that provides that each parent has the right to possession of the child under one of the following arrangements:

(1)  an arrangement under which each parent has possession of the child for one week at a time, alternating weeks of possession with the other parent, with no modification based on holidays that occur during each week, but subject to modification based on agreement by each parent;[6]

(2)  an arrangement under which each parent has possession of the child for two weeks at a time, alternating two-week periods of possession with the other parent, with one weeknight of possession exercised during each week of the period by the parent not otherwise in possession during that period, and subject to modification based on agreement by each parent;[7]

(3)  an arrangement under which each parent has possession of the child for four weeks at a time, alternating four-week periods of possession with the other parent, with one weeknight of possession exercised during each week of the period by the parent not otherwise in possession during that period, and subject to modification based on agreement by each parent; or[8]

(4)  an arrangement under which each parent has possession of the child under a schedule specified by the court, provided that:

(A)  the schedule may not grant possession to a parent for a number of days each year that exceeds the number of days of possession granted to the other parent for that year by more than five days; and[9]

(B)  the schedule must alternate on a yearly basis the parent who is granted possession for a number of days for the year that exceeds the number of days granted to the other parent.[10]

(b)  A court shall provide parents with the opportunity to select by agreement one of the arrangements described by Subsection (a)(1), (2), or (3), subject to the court's determination that the selected arrangement is in the best interest of the child.  If the parents do not agree, the court may order any arrangement described by Subsection (a).[11]

SECTION 4.  The enactment of this Act does not constitute a material and substantial change of circumstances sufficient to warrant modification of a court order or portion of a decree that provides for the possession of or access to a child rendered before the effective date of this Act.[12]

SECTION 5.  The change in law made by this Act applies to a suit affecting the parent-child relationship that is pending in a trial court on the effective date of this Act or that is filed on or after the effective date of this Act.

SECTION 6.  This Act takes effect September 1, 2015.


[1] Lack of an evidentiary standard of review. Without a proper evidentiary standard of review, the court is still open to apply its own personal thoughts into the matters of the family.

[2] What is the legal definition of best interest of the child?

[3] When every family is different, why do standard orders exist and why are they even permitted especially in light of the fact that previously this called for equal custody as being the policy of the state.

[4] Lack of an evidentiary standard of review.

[5] See Note 2

[6] Best left for the individual parents to decide and language that is best suited for a parenting plan that the parents, not the Court or the state, develops.

[7] See Note 6

[8] See Note 6 Additionally long separations for allow for abuse by the possessory parent that could damage the parent/child relationship.  

[9] This is a mathematical impossibility as the number of days in a year is 365 with the exception of Leap Years when it is 366. Are we expecting now that the Court is to assign one day to be divided in half based on hours in the day? Which parent would then be awarded the normal sleeping hours of the child or we to expect that the sleeping hours are to also be divided to cause disruption for the child?

[10] This contradicts the statement and instructions to the courts in the previous line.

[11] Lack of an evidentiary standard by which the Courts are to make their available schedules selection to the parents. Additional I need to question why the Courts and not the parents are being allowed to make the determination as to what is best for the family.

[12] Does not allow old orders to be brought up for changes that are brought by the new law. I see cause for delay in cases in hopes that they would end after this bill would be passed into law just to take advantage of the new law. Should a parent not know that this has been enacted and get their determination made by the Court the day before enactment, they are stuck working and living by old standards of law.