Child custody determinations

AN ACT Relating to determining child custody; and adding a new 1
section to chapter 26.09 RCW. 2
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON:3
NEW SECTION. Sec. 1. A new section is added to chapter 26.09 4
RCW to read as follows: 5
(1) The paramount concern of all child custody decisions must be 6
to provide complete health and safety when determining the best 7
interests of the child. 8
(2) Whenever domestic violence or child abuse is raised as an 9
issue either during or before a child custody matter is litigated, 10
any professional who provides advice or recommendations to the court 11
must have substantial training and experience about domestic violence 12
and child abuse to fully understand safety issues, including: 13
Behaviors that are associated with higher lethality or injury risks; 14
domestic violence dynamics; effects of domestic violence on children; 15
and ability to recognize domestic violence and research about 16
batterer narratives. Any professional without this necessary 17
expertise must consult with someone who has this knowledge prior to 18
giving any recommendation to the court. 19
(3) A postgraduate degree in mental health, including psychology, 20
psychiatry, or social work, absent specialized and approved training 21
S-1260.1
SENATE BILL 5706
State of Washington 69th Legislature 2025 Regular Session
By Senator Fortunato
p. 1 SB 5706
may not be considered proof of domestic violence expertise. A court 1
may not refuse to qualify a professional as a domestic violence 2
expert because the professional does not possess a postgraduate 3
degree if the professional can demonstrate expertise based upon 4
training and experience. 5
(4) In any custody case where either domestic violence or child 6
abuse is raised during the litigation process and even where a court 7
may have already heard and determined there is not significant enough 8
domestic violence to warrant a restraining order and in which there 9
is no substantial basis to believe the parties or children have a 10
significant mental health impairment likely to interfere with 11
parenting ability, courts should not order a mental health 12
evaluation. The court may appoint a domestic violence expert to help 13
the court understand the significance of evidence related to domestic 14
violence and must permit parties to present evidence from a domestic 15
violence expert. 16
(5) Courts shall look to current, valid scientific research 17
concerning domestic violence to help inform its decisions in all 18
cases where domestic violence or child abuse is raised during the 19
course of custody litigation. Courts may not permit practices or 20
approaches that do not have scientific bases and are not accepted 21
practice within the specialized field of practice of domestic 22
violence and child abuse. Professionals who engage in practices based 23
upon such unscientific beliefs may not be qualified to participate in 24
custody cases where domestic violence or child abuse is raised during 25
the course of litigation. 26
(6) In cases in which allegations of domestic violence are 27
supported by the preponderance of the evidence, the safe, or safer, 28
parent must receive sole custody absent clear and convincing proof 29
that the parent creates an imminent safety risk to the children. The 30
parent who has committed domestic violence must be permitted only 31
supervised visitation pending a risk assessment by a domestic 32
violence/child abuse professional. In order for the abusive parent to 33
obtain unsupervised visitation, the parent shall complete at least a 34
six-month accountability program, accept full responsibility for past 35
abuse, commit to never abusing the children or future partners, 36
understand the harm the abuse caused, and convince the court that the 37
benefit of unsupervised visitation outweighs any risk. Termination of 38
all visitation should be considered upon proofs of failure to comply 39
as it will present the children with a known dangerous circumstance.40
p. 2 SB 5706
(7) A parent may not be penalized for making a good faith 1
complaint about domestic violence or child abuse. 2
(8) Courts may not use approaches developed for "high conflict" 3
cases designed to encourage parents to cooperate in any litigated 4
custody case if there have been allegations of domestic violence 5
and/or child abuse which have been supported with an expert report 6
opining there is a reasonable risk to children and shared parenting 7
may not be permitted in these cases absent voluntary consent of both 8
parties. Consent must be determined to be without coercion or undue 9
pressure. 10
(9) In cases in which there are allegations of domestic violence, 11
a history between the parties that includes restraining orders, 12
criminal charges, or other evidence of possible domestic violence, 13
early in the proceeding, before the appointment of any guardian ad 14
litem, evaluator, or other neutral professional the court shall 15
conduct an evidentiary hearing to determine if one of the parties has 16
engaged in a pattern of domestic violence. If the court finds 17
domestic violence and the non or less abusive parent is safe the 18
court shall award custody to the safe parent and supervised 19
visitation to the abusive parent. A finding denying the allegations 20
of domestic violence may not prevent the court from considering 21
additional evidence of domestic violence later in the case.22
(10) In any case in which the trial judge engaged in or tolerated 23
gender-biased practices or permitted practices or approaches based on 24
myths, stereotypes, or other bias, an appellate court may not defer 25
to the judgment of the trial court. 26
(11) In any case involving allegations of child sexual abuse, any 27
professionals asked by the court for a risk assessment or evaluation 28
must have specialized training and experience of a minimum of five 29
years after completing training working with children and expertise 30
in child sexual abuse. Investigators must take sufficient time to 31
develop a trusting relationship before expecting the child to speak 32
about the allegations. A recantation by a child of a valid allegation 33
of child abuse may not by itself be treated as absolute proof that 34
the allegation was false. No negative inferences may be drawn from a 35
decision by a prosecutor or child protective agency not to file 36
charges against a named perpetrator of domestic violence or child 37
abuse and may not be treated as proof the allegations are untrue. 38
Given the difficulty of proving valid complaints about child sexual 39
abuse, judges who make a finding that the allegations were 40
p. 3 SB 5706
deliberately false must demonstrate they considered not only if the 1
allegations are true but other common circumstances such as violation 2
of boundaries, inadequate information to determine the validity of 3
the allegations, and mistaken allegations made in good faith. In 4
cases in which a court determined sexual abuse allegations cannot be 5
proven, the court shall consider new evidence in the context of the 6
evidence previously considered. No decision may be made by a court 7
absent a full evidentiary hearing with the parent having a right to 8
have an expert of their choosing heard by the court. No preference 9
and no deference may be given to any expert selected by the court and 10
the trial court must apply identical standards of review and 11
credibility. 12
(12)(a) The purpose of this section is to correct common present 13
practices that have been shown to work poorly for the protection of 14
children. The legislature encourages custody court professionals to 15
look to current, valid, scientific research to inform their decisions 16
and stop using the outdated and discredited practices described in 17
the legislative history. The use of such flawed practices in prior 18
decisions are considered a change of circumstance that entitles the 19
parties to request the court to reconsider arrangements that were 20
created based upon flawed practices. 21
(b) Any judge who hears a case involving the issue of domestic 22
violence and/or child abuse as part of judicial responsibility shall 23
receive specialized training regarding the new practices adopted by 24
this section and the specialized information it is based upon. Judges 25
must receive retraining concerning prior practices which have not 26
worked to sufficiently protect children. Guardians ad litem appointed 27
to represent children where domestic violence and/or child abuse is 28
raised during the course of litigation must receive specialized 29
training and retraining. 30
(13)(a) Domestic violence advocates or other similar experts 31
knowledgeable about the safety practices described in this section 32
and current scientific research shall provide trainings to judges and 33
guardians ad litem. 34
(b) Subject to the availability of funds appropriated for this 35
specific purpose, the state shall provide additional funding to 36
domestic violence agencies to train advocates to serve as domestic 37
violence experts in court and to help train court personnel.38
--- END ---
p. 4 SB 5706