wa-law.org > bill > 2025-26 > HB 1620 > Engrossed Substitute
PURPOSE.Understanding the effects of domestic violence and child abuse on all members of a family is crucial to discerning the best interest of a child in cases with evidence of such abuse. The determination of a child's best interest in these cases first requires that existing best interest factors be evaluated in light of the domestic violence or child abuse and requires consideration of the additional factors in subsection (4) of this section. This section sets forth the analysis and findings a court shall undertake if domestic violence or child abuse is present or alleged at any time during a case, based on the preponderance of the evidence, in which child custody and parenting time between the parents is at issue.
GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS.
In entering a permanent parenting plan, the court shall not draw any presumptions from the provisions of the temporary parenting plan.
In determining whether any of the conduct described in this section or section 2 of this act has occurred, the court shall apply the rules of evidence and civil procedure except where the parties have opted for an informal family law trial pursuant to state or local court rules.
DEFINITIONS.The definitions in this subsection apply throughout this section and section 2 of this act unless the context clearly requires otherwise.
"Child" shall also mean "children."
"Domestic abuse" means child abuse or domestic violence as defined in RCW 7.105.010.
"Knowingly" means knows or reasonably should know.
"Limitation" means a provision, requirement, or order placed on an abusive parent.
"Parenting functions" has the same meaning as in RCW 26.09.004.
"Protective actions" are actions taken by a parent in good faith for the purpose of protecting themselves or the parent's child from the risk of harm posed by the other parent. "Protective actions" can include, but are not limited to: (i) Reports or complaints regarding physical, sexual, or mental abuse of a child or child neglect to an individual or entity connected to the provision of care or safety of the child such as law enforcement, medical professionals, therapists, schools, day cares, or child protective services; (ii) seeking court orders changing residential time; or (iii) petitions for protection or restraining orders.
"Sex offense against a child" means any of the following offenses involving a child victim: (i) Any sex offense as defined in RCW 9.94A.030; (ii) any offense with a finding of sexual motivation; (iii) any offense in violation of chapter 9A.44 RCW other than RCW 9A.44.132; (iv) any offense involving the sexual abuse of a minor, including any offense under chapter 9.68A RCW; or (v) any federal or out-of-state offense comparable to any offense under (g)(i) through (iv) of this subsection.
"Social worker" means a person with a master's degree or further advanced degree from a social work educational program accredited and approved as provided in RCW 18.320.010.
DOMESTIC ABUSE FACTORS.
Before considering the best interest of the child factors as set forth in RCW 26.09.187, the court shall first consider the following factors and make specific written findings regarding each factor:
The nature and context of the domestic violence by one parent against the other parent or any family member of the parent who is abusive, considering the dynamics of the primary aggressor;
The nature and context of any abuse experienced by the child from the parent who is abusive;
Relevant and admissible evidence of current or past acts of domestic abuse, whether or not there is a conviction for any offense of domestic abuse, a current or expired order for protection involving the child or parent, or previous court or administrative agency findings on domestic abuse;
Any information about current or future risk of harm to the child or the parent or family member who is abused posed by the abusive parent, including a child's expressions of distress about or resistance to contact with the parent who is abusive. Any distress or resistance expressed by a child may not be presumed to be caused by the abused and protective parent;
The effects of domestic violence or child abuse on the child's well-being; and
In compliance with the federal keeping children safe from family violence act, Title 34 U.S.C. Sec. 10446, as amended, any neutral professional appointed by a court to express an opinion relating to abuse, trauma, or the behavior of victims and perpetrators of abuse and trauma must demonstrate expertise and substantial direct experience working with victims of domestic violence or child abuse, including child sexual abuse, that is not primarily forensic in nature.
Regardless of the outcome of the domestic abuse analysis under this subsection, the court shall consider the best interest of the child factors as outlined in RCW 26.09.187 before making decisions related to custody and parenting time.
MATTERS NOT TO BE CONSIDERED AS EVIDENCE AGAINST AN ABUSED PARENT.
In determining a child's best interest in a case, the court may not consider as evidence against an abused parent:
Actions that are not prohibited by law;
Efforts by a parent who is abused to protect the parent's own safety or the parent's child's safety from the other parent. This evidence may not be considered as evidence of unwillingness to facilitate contact or a positive relationship between the parent who is abusive and the child or to cooperate with the abusive parent. A parent who is abused is exempt from any best interest factor or presumption requiring such willingness; and
Evidence that the parent who is abused suffers from the effects of the abuse by the other parent. This evidence may not be the basis for denying a parent who is abused custody or parenting time including, but not limited to, a discretionary finding in RCW 26.09.187.
The court may not, primarily in order to improve a deficient relationship with the other parent:
Remove the child from a parent who is competent, protective, and not physically or sexually abusive, and with whom the child is bonded; or
Restrict contact between the child and a parent who is competent, protective, and not physically or sexually abusive, and with whom the child is bonded.
The court may not remove the child from a competent, protective, and not physically or sexually abusive parent or restrict contact between the child and a competent, protective, and not physically or sexually abusive parent solely on the basis of protective actions taken by a competent, protective, and not physically or sexually abusive parent.
MUTUAL ALLEGATIONS OF DOMESTIC ABUSE. If both parents present evidence that the other parent has engaged in acts of domestic abuse, the court shall hold an evidentiary hearing regarding the allegations. If the court makes a finding that both parents have engaged in acts of domestic abuse, the court shall assess and make findings regarding the following factors to assist in determining the parent that poses the lesser risk to the child and is less likely to commit acts of domestic abuse in the future:
The nature and effects of the abuse on either parent, including whether either party has engaged in coercive control;
Whether any physical act was in response to domestic abuse by the other parent;
The impact of the domestic abuse on parenting behaviors and attributes;
The effect on the child of the domestic abuse perpetrated by each parent; and
The likelihood of future acts of domestic abuse being perpetrated by either parent based on that parent's history.
PARENTAL CONDUCT REQUIRING LIMITS ON DISPUTE RESOLUTION, A PARENT'S DECISION MAKING, AND A PARENT'S RESIDENTIAL TIME.
Conduct Requiring Limitations. Limitations are required if it is found that a parent has engaged in any of the following conduct:
Physical abuse of a child;
A pattern of emotional abuse of a child;
A history of acts of domestic violence as defined in RCW 7.105.010 ;
An assault that causes grievous bodily harm or the fear of such harm
against the child or other parent;
v. Any sexual assault; or
vi. Sexual abuse of a child. Required limitations and considerations for a parent who has been convicted of a sex offense against a child or found to have sexually abused a child in the current case or a prior case are addressed in section 2 of this act.
b. Mandatory Dispute Resolution Limitations. The permanent parenting plan must not designate a dispute resolution process other than court action. There is no rebuttable presumption. The court may not require face-to-face mediation, arbitration, or interventions, including therapeutic interventions, that require the parties to share the same physical or virtual space if there has been a finding of domestic violence.
c. Mandatory Decision-Making Limitations. The permanent parenting plan must not require mutual decision making. There is no rebuttable presumption. Where there has been a finding of domestic violence, including against a primary aggressor parent, sole decision making must be awarded to the other parent and not to the parent against whom a domestic violence finding has been made.
d. Mandatory Residential Time Limitations. There is a rebuttable presumption that the permanent parenting plan cannot require joint residential time with or grant sole residential time to the abusive parent.
e. Allowing Access. If the court grants any type of custody or parenting time to a parent who perpetrated domestic abuse or child abuse, whether after a hearing or by agreement between the parents, the court shall:
i. Grant majority custody to the party who is not abusive. The court may only grant majority custody to the party who is abusive if it is by agreement of the parties and the court deems it safe for the child; and
ii. Make detailed findings regarding how the custody or parenting time ordered by the court adequately protects the child and the parent who is abused from the risk of future harm and addresses the effects of the domestic abuse or child abuse.
PARENT RESIDING WITH A PERSON WHOSE CONDUCT MAY REQUIRE RESIDENTIAL TIME LIMITATIONS.A parent's residential time with the child shall be limited if it is found that the parent knowingly resides with a person who has engaged in any of the following conduct:
Physical abuse of a child;
A pattern of emotional abuse of a child;
A history of acts of domestic violence as defined in RCW 7.105.010 ;
An assault that causes grievous bodily harm or the fear of such harm
against a family or household member;
e. Any sexual assault; or
f. Sexual abuse of a child. Required limitations and considerations on a parent who resides with someone convicted of a sex offense against a child or found to have sexually abused a child in the current case or a prior case are addressed in section 2 of this act.
LIMITATIONS A COURT MAY IMPOSE ON A PARENT'S RESIDENTIAL TIME WHEN THERE IS A FINDING OF DOMESTIC ABUSE.
After having assessed the nature, context, and effects of the domestic abuse, the court shall address the identified effects of the domestic abuse or child abuse on the child, including the child's present and future safety, and its effects on the parenting of the parent who is abused.
The limitations that may be imposed by the court under this section must be reasonably calculated to protect a child from the physical, sexual, or emotional abuse or harm that could result if a child has contact with the parent requesting residential time. The limitations shall also be reasonably calculated to provide for the safety of the parent who may be at risk of physical, sexual, or emotional abuse or harm that could result if the parent has contact with the other parent.
The limitations the court may impose include, but are not limited to:
(A) If the court requires supervised visitation, there is a presumption that the supervision shall be provided by a professional supervisor. This presumption is overcome if the court finds: (I) There is a lay person who has demonstrated through sworn testimony and evidence of past interactions with children that they are capable and committed to protecting the child from physical or emotional abuse or harm; and (II) the parent is unable to access professional supervision due to (1) geographic isolation or other factors that would make professionally supervised visitation inaccessible or (2) financial indigency that has been demonstrated by a general rule 34 waiver or other evidence that the parent's current income and necessary expenses do not allow for the cost of professional supervision.
(B) For all supervision, the court shall include clear written guidelines and prohibitions to be followed by the supervised party. No visits shall take place until the supervised parent and supervisor, or designated representative of a professional supervision program, have signed an acknowledgment confirming that they have read the court orders and the guidelines and prohibitions regarding visitation and agree to follow them. The court shall only permit supervision by an individual or program that is committed to protecting the child from any physical or emotional abuse or harm and is willing and capable of intervening in behaviors inconsistent with the court orders and guidelines.
(C) A parent may seek an emergency ex parte order temporarily suspending residential time until review by the court if: (I) The supervised parent repeatedly violates the court order or guidelines; (II) the supervised parent threatens the supervisor or child with physical harm, commits an act of domestic violence, or materially violates any treatment condition associated with any restrictions under this section (a missed counseling appointment does not constitute a violation); (III) the supervisor is unable or unwilling to protect the child and/or the protected parent; or (IV) the supervisor is no longer willing to provide service to the supervised parent. The court suspending residential time shall set a review hearing to take place within 14 days of entering the ex parte order.
ii. Evaluation Or Treatment.
(A) Where appropriate, the court may condition residential time on successful completion of a program of intervention for parents who abuse their partners or children, including programs focused on the impact of domestic violence on children and ways to promote safe, positive parenting, or other state-certified domestic violence perpetrator treatment programs approved under RCW 43.20A.735.
(B) The court shall determine whether a parent has successfully completed a program described in (c)(ii)(A) of this subsection based on information provided by the program director regarding the participation of the abusive parent in the program and with collateral input provided from the other parent. Any evaluation report that does not include collateral input must provide details as to why and the attempts made to obtain collateral input.
(C) The court may refer, but may not order, a parent who is abused to receive services relating to the impact of current or past domestic violence on the parent who is abused and the child.
(D) A parent's residential time may be conditioned on the parent's completion of an evaluation or treatment ordered by the court.
iii. No Contact. If, based on the evidence, the court expressly finds that limitations on the residential time with a child will not adequately protect a child from the harm or abuse that could result if a child has contact with the parent requesting residential time, the court shall restrain the parent requesting residential time from all contact with a child.
DETERMINATION NOT TO IMPOSE LIMITATIONS ON RESIDENTIAL TIME. This subsection does not apply to findings of sexual abuse which are governed by section 2 of this act.
Determining Whether The Presumption Is Rebutted. If the court grants any type of residential time to a parent who perpetrated domestic violence or child abuse, whether after a hearing or by agreement between the parents, the court shall make detailed written findings regarding how the custody or parenting time ordered by the court adequately protects the child and the parent who is abused from the risk of future harm and addresses the effects of the domestic violence or child abuse.
(A) The nature and context of the domestic violence involving the parents, parenting behaviors and attributes, and the effects of the abuse on the child's well-being;
(B) Any current risk posed by the parent to the well-being of the child or other parent;
(C) Whether the parent who engaged in domestic abuse has demonstrated that they can and will prioritize the child's well-being;
(D) Whether the parent has adhered to and is likely to adhere to court orders;
(E) Whether the parent who is abusive has genuinely acknowledged past harm and is committed to avoiding harm in the future and has made the necessary changes; and
(F) A parent's compliance with any previously court-ordered treatment. A parent's compliance with the requirements for participation in a treatment program does not, by itself, constitute evidence that the parent has made the requisite changes.
ii. Regardless of whether the domestic violence presumption against residential time is rebutted, the court shall consider the best interest of the child factors as outlined in RCW 26.09.187 before making decisions related to custody and parenting time.
b. Requirement For Specific Findings On The Record. If a court grants parenting time to a parent who engaged in domestic abuse, the court shall make specific written findings on the record that detail:
i. The factors in (a) of this subsection that rebut the domestic violence presumption and therefore allow for the custody or parenting time;
ii. That such factors are not based on a criterion in subsection (5) of this section;
iii. How the order will promote the child's well-being; and
iv. How the order will protect the other parent from harm posed by the parent who is abusive.
c. Once The Presumption Has Been Rebutted.
i. After the court has considered the specific factors related to domestic violence as outlined in subsection (4) of this section and determined that it is in the child's best interest for the abusive parent to have parenting time or visitation, a court shall order appropriate residential time provisions to promote the safety and well-being of the child and the parent who is abused, as set forth in this section.
ii. The court shall set out in the initial order not only the protective provisions and duration, but also the necessary behavioral changes that would support a modification of the order.
iii. Whether or not residential time is allowed, the court may, at the request of a party or on its own, order that specific information be kept confidential.
iv. The court shall determine and order specific protective measures needed for contact, exchange, and parenting time or visitation.
v. The court should impose, to the extent possible, measures that will provide the safest conditions that promote the safety and well-being of the child and abused parent for the parent who is abusive to have the residential time ordered by the court.
vi. Where appropriate, the court may order that exchanges of children between the parents be supervised, without supervision of the parenting time or visitation. There is a presumption that the supervision of the exchange must be provided by a professional supervisor. This presumption is overcome if the court finds that:
(A) There is a layperson who has demonstrated through sworn testimony and evidence of past interactions with children that they are capable of and committed to protecting the child from physical or emotional abuse or harm during the exchange; and
(B) The parent is unable to access professional exchange supervision due to (I) geographic isolation or other factors that would make professionally supervised exchange inaccessible or (II) financial indigency that has been demonstrated by a general rule 34 waiver or other evidence that the parent's current income and necessary expenses do not allow for the cost of professional exchange supervision.
vii. Where necessary to protect the safety and well-being of the child and the parent who is abused, the court may order supervised parenting time or visitation in compliance with subsection (9) of this section.
viii. A court order for supervised visitation or supervised exchange should include specific protective measures for arrival and departure at the visitation or exchange location.
ix. Whether or not the court has imposed a required level of supervision for residential time or exchange, the court shall order conditions necessary to promote and enhance the safety and well-being
of the child and the parent who is abused. The court should ensure such conditions are met and continue to be met for the duration of the court order. Prohibitions and requirements that may be imposed upon the parent who is abusive as a condition of residential time include, but are not limited to:
(A) Prohibiting possession or consumption of alcohol or controlled substances during the residential time and for 24 hours preceding the parenting time or visitation;
(B) Requiring surrender of all firearms and ammunition for a period of time determined by the court for the safety of the child and the parent who is abused;
(C) Assessing any fees associated with the use of the court-ordered supervised visitation against the parent who is abusive, unless the fees pose a barrier to accessing the services or are an undue hardship. The court shall not assess fees related to supervision against the parent who is abused;
(D) Prohibiting overnight parenting time or visitation;
(E) Limiting communication with the child or the parent who is abused by specifying the frequency and methods of communication and the permissible reasons for such communication;
(F) Requiring location settings or devices be used during the residential time with the parent who is abusive; or
(G) Any other condition that is deemed necessary to provide for the safety and well-being of the child or the parent who is abused, or other family or household member.
This section governs limitations on residential provisions, decision-making authority, and dispute resolution when a parent, or a person the parent resides with, has been convicted of a sex offense against a child or found to have sexually abused a child.
SEXUALLY VIOLENT PREDATORS. If a parent has been found to be a sexually violent predator under chapter 71.09 RCW or under an analogous statute of any other jurisdiction, the court shall restrain the parent from contact with a child that would otherwise be allowed under this chapter. If a parent resides with an adult or a juvenile who has been found to be a sexually violent predator under chapter 71.09 RCW or under an analogous statute of any other jurisdiction, the court shall restrain the parent from contact with the parent's child except contact that occurs outside the predator's presence.
CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE BY PARENT.
A parent who has been convicted as an adult of a sex offense against any child in this or another jurisdiction poses a present danger to a child. The court shall restrain the parent from all contact with the parent's child that would otherwise be allowed under this chapter.
The court shall not enter an order allowing a parent to have contact with the parent's child if the parent has been found by a preponderance of the evidence in a dependency or family law action, including in the current case, to have sexually abused any child of the parents.
PARENT RESIDING WITH A PERSON FOUND TO HAVE SEXUALLY ABUSED A CHILD.
There is a rebuttable presumption that a parent who knowingly resides with a person who, as an adult, has been convicted of a sex offense against a child, or as a juvenile has been adjudicated of a sex offense against a child at least eight years younger, in this or another jurisdiction, places a child at risk of abuse or harm when that parent exercises residential time in the presence of the convicted or adjudicated person. Unless the parent rebuts the presumption, the court shall restrain the parent from contact with the parent's child except for contact that occurs outside of the convicted or adjudicated person's presence.
The court shall not enter an order allowing a parent to have contact with the child in the offender's presence if the parent resides with a person who has been found by a preponderance of the evidence in a dependency or family law action, including in the current case, to have sexually abused a child, unless the court finds that the parent accepts that the person engaged in the harmful conduct and the parent is willing to and capable of protecting the child from harm from the person and a neutral professional appointed by the court expresses an opinion relating to abuse, trauma, or the behavior of victims and perpetrators of abuse and trauma. The professional must demonstrate expertise and substantial direct experience working with victims of domestic violence or child abuse, including child sexual abuse, that is not primarily forensic in nature.
REBUTTING THE PRESUMPTION OF NO CONTACT WHEN A PARENT RESIDES WITH OFFENDING PERSON.
The presumption established in subsection (3)(a) of this section may be rebutted only after express written findings based on clear and convincing evidence that if the child was not the victim of the sex offense committed by the person who is residing with the parent requesting residential time, (i) contact between the child and the parent residing with the convicted or adjudicated person is appropriate and that parent is able to protect the child in the presence of the convicted or adjudicated person, and (ii) the convicted or adjudicated person has provided documentation that they have successfully completed treatment for sex offenders or are engaged in and making progress in such treatment, if any was ordered by a court.
Contact If Presumption Rebutted.
If the court finds that the parent has met the burden of rebutting the presumption under (a) of this subsection, the court may allow a parent residing with a person who has been convicted of a sex offense against a child or adjudicated of a juvenile sex offense with a child at least eight years younger to have residential time with the child in the presence of that person, supervised by a neutral and independent adult and pursuant to an adequate plan for supervision of such residential time. The supervisor may be the parent if the court finds, based on the evidence, that the parent is willing and capable of protecting the child from harm. The court shall revoke court approval of the supervisor, including the parent, upon finding, based on the evidence, that the supervisor has failed to protect the child or is no longer willing or capable of protecting the child;
A court shall not order unsupervised contact between the offending parent and a child of the offending parent who was sexually abused by that parent.
RESTRICTED DECISION MAKING AND DISPUTE RESOLUTION. The parenting plan shall not require mutual decision making or designation of a dispute resolution process other than court action if it is found that a parent has been convicted as an adult of a sex offense against any child in this or any other jurisdiction, has been found to be a sexually violent predator under chapter 71.09 RCW or under an analogous statute of any other jurisdiction, or has been found by a preponderance of the evidence in a dependency or family law action, including in the current case, to have sexually abused any child of the parents.
The legislature respectfully requests that the administrative office of the courts develop online continuing education curricula for judicial officers providing guidance on best practices for adjudicating contested parenting plans in the best interests of the child.
Subject to the availability of amounts appropriated for this specific purpose, the legislature respectfully requests that the administrative office of the courts develop evidence-based training curricula for the purpose of instructing judicial officers, including persons serving as judicial officers pro tempore, regarding the elements of trauma-informed resolution in complicated family law proceedings involving contested parenting plans. The training curricula should incorporate the lethality risk assessment tool and the adverse childhood experiences score. Once developed, the training should be included as a component of training for judicial officers offered by the Washington judicial college. All newly elected or appointed judicial officers should complete the training within 12 months of their election or appointment. Judicial officers should complete continuing education regarding this subject matter every three years.
After a hearing under RCW 11.130.195, the court may appoint a guardian for a minor, if appointment is proper under RCW 11.130.185, dismiss the proceeding, or take other appropriate action consistent with this chapter or law of this state other than this chapter.
In appointing a guardian under subsection (1) of this section, the following rules apply:
The court shall appoint a person nominated as guardian by a parent of the minor in a probated will or other record unless the court finds the appointment is contrary to the best interest of the minor. Any "other record" must be a declaration or other sworn document and may include a power of attorney or other sworn statement as to the care, custody, or control of the minor child.
If multiple parents have nominated different persons to serve as guardian, the court shall appoint the nominee whose appointment is in the best interest of the minor, unless the court finds that appointment of none of the nominees is in the best interest of the minor.
If a guardian is not appointed under (a) or (b) of this subsection, the court shall appoint the person nominated by the minor if the minor is twelve years of age or older unless the court finds that appointment is contrary to the best interest of the minor. In that case, the court shall appoint as guardian a person whose appointment is in the best interest of the minor.
In the interest of maintaining or encouraging involvement by a minor's parent in the minor's life, developing self-reliance of the minor, or for other good cause, the court, at the time of appointment of a guardian for the minor or later, on its own or on motion of the minor or other interested person, may create a limited guardianship by limiting the powers otherwise granted by this article to the guardian. Following the same procedure, the court may grant additional powers or withdraw powers previously granted.
The court, as part of an order appointing a guardian for a minor, shall state rights retained by any parent of the minor, which shall preserve the parent-child relationship through an order for parent-child visitation and other contact, unless the court finds the relationship should be limited or restricted under RCW 26.09.191 or section 2 of this act; and which may include decision making regarding the minor's health care, education, or other matter, or access to a record regarding the minor.
An order granting a guardianship for a minor must state that each parent of the minor is entitled to notice that:
The guardian has delegated custody of the minor subject to guardianship;
The court has modified or limited the powers of the guardian; or
The court has removed the guardian.
An order granting a guardianship for a minor must identify any person in addition to a parent of the minor which is entitled to notice of the events listed in subsection (5) of this section.
An order granting guardianship for a minor must direct the clerk of the court to issue letters of office to the guardian containing an expiration date which should be the minor's eighteenth birthday.
DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROCESS. The court shall not order a dispute resolution process, except court action, when it finds that any limiting factor under RCW 26.09.191 or section 2 of this act applies, or when it finds that either parent is unable to afford the cost of the proposed dispute resolution process. If a dispute resolution process is not precluded or limited, then in designating such a process the court shall consider all relevant factors, including:
Differences between the parents that would substantially inhibit their effective participation in any designated process;
The parents' wishes or agreements and, if the parents have entered into agreements, whether the agreements were made knowingly and voluntarily; and
Differences in the parents' financial circumstances that may affect their ability to participate fully in a given dispute resolution process.
ALLOCATION OF DECISION-MAKING AUTHORITY.
AGREEMENTS BETWEEN THE PARTIES. The court shall approve agreements of the parties allocating decision-making authority, or specifying rules in the areas listed in RCW 26.09.184(5)(a), when it finds that:
The agreement is consistent with any limitations on a parent's decision-making authority mandated by RCW 26.09.191 and section 2 of this act; and
The agreement is knowing and voluntary.
SOLE DECISION-MAKING AUTHORITY. The court shall order sole decisionmaking to one parent when it finds that:
A limitation on the other parent's decision-making authority is mandated by RCW 26.09.191 or section 2 of this act. The parent who has been abused must be awarded sole decision making;
Both parents are opposed to mutual decision making;
One parent is opposed to mutual decision making, and such opposition is reasonable based on the criteria in (c) of this subsection.
MUTUAL DECISION-MAKING AUTHORITY. Except as provided in (a) and (b) of this subsection, the court shall consider the following criteria in allocating decision-making authority:
The existence of a limitation under RCW 26.09.191 or section 2 of this act;
The history of participation of each parent in decision making in each of the areas in RCW 26.09.184(5)(a);
Whether the parents have a demonstrated ability and desire to cooperate with one another in decision making in each of the areas in RCW 26.09.184(5)(a); and
The parents' geographic proximity to one another, to the extent that it affects their ability to make timely mutual decisions.
RESIDENTIAL PROVISIONS.
The court shall make residential provisions for each child which encourage each parent to maintain a loving, stable, and nurturing relationship with the child, consistent with the child's developmental level and the family's social and economic circumstances. The child's residential schedule shall be consistent with RCW 26.09.191 and section 2 of this act.
When there is a history of domestic violence, after having assessed the nature, context, and effects of the domestic abuse per RCW 26.09.191, the court shall address the identified effects of the domestic abuse or child abuse on the child, including the child's present and future safety, and its effects on the parenting of the parent who is abused.
Provisions to promote the safety, recovery, and resilience of the child and the parent who is abused could include, but are not limited to:
Ensuring that the parenting plan accommodates the child's interests, activities, cultural traditions, and support systems;
Connecting the child and the parent who is abused to available community-based resources;
Requiring the parent who is abusive to pay for any associated costs of services needed to respond to the domestic abuse, unless the costs pose an undue hardship. The court shall not assess costs against the parent who is abused;
If available, requiring the abusive parent to attend a program aimed at raising awareness of the harm domestic abuse caused to the child and the family, addressing safe and healthy parenting, and requiring the abusive parent to make a commitment to not repeat the abuse; and
Any other provision that promotes the safety, resiliency, and well-being of the child and the safety of the parent who is abused.
In addition to the factors in this section, the court shall consider and make findings regarding how domestic abuse affects all other best interest of the child factors under (e) of this subsection.
In addition to the best interest factors outlined in this section, when domestic abuse has been found pursuant to RCW 26.09.191, the court shall consider the following best interest of the child factors in all cases:
The relative strength, nature, and stability of the child's relationship with each parent;
The agreements of the parties, provided they were entered into knowingly and voluntarily;
Each parent's past and potential for future performance of parenting functions as defined in RCW 26.09.004(2), including whether a parent has taken greater responsibility for performing parenting functions relating to the daily needs of the child;
Whether a parent's involvement or conduct has had an adverse impact on the child's best interests because of:
(A) Willful abandonment or a parent's substantial nonperformance of parenting functions. Willful abandonment has occurred when the child's parent has expressed, either by statement or conduct, an intent to forego, for an extended period, parental rights or responsibilities despite an ability to exercise such rights and responsibilities. Willful abandonment does not include a parent who has been unable to see the child due to circumstances that include, but are not limited to: Incarceration, deportation, inpatient treatment, medical emergency, fleeing to an emergency shelter or domestic violence shelter, or withholding of the child by the other parent;
(B) A serious mental illness as defined by the Americans with disabilities act, or physical impairment that interferes with the parent's performance of parenting functions. However, a parent's disability may not serve as the sole basis for limiting residential time, and a parent's mental health condition arising from being abused shall not be a basis for limiting residential time;
(C) A long-term impairment resulting from drug, alcohol, or other substance abuse that interferes with the performance of parenting functions;
(D) The absence or substantial impairment of emotional ties between the parent and the child within the parent's control;
(E) Withholding of access to the child by a parent for a protracted period. Withholding does not include protective actions as defined in RCW 26.09.191 taken by a parent in good faith for the legitimate and lawful purpose of protecting the parent or the parent's child from the risk of harm posed by the other parent; or
(F) Such other factors or conduct as the court expressly finds adverse to the best interests of the child. If the court finds that conduct under this subsection (3)(e)(iv) has had an adverse impact on the child's best interests, the court may craft parenting plan provisions to support the parent and the child in addressing the conduct;
v. The child's emotional and social needs, adjustment to changes in daily life, and developmental level of the child;
vi. The child's relationship with siblings and with other significant adults, as well as the child's involvement with his or her physical surroundings, school, or other significant activities;
vii. The wishes of the parents and the wishes of a child who is sufficiently mature to express reasoned and independent preferences as to his or her residential schedule; and
viii. Each parent's employment schedule, and shall make accommodations consistent with those schedules.
Factor (i) shall be given the greatest weight.
f. Where the limitations of RCW 26.09.191 or section 2 of this act are not dispositive, the court may order that a child frequently alternate his or her residence between the households of the parents for brief and substantially equal intervals of time if such provision is in the best interests of the child. In determining whether such an arrangement is in the best interests of the child, the court may consider the parties geographic proximity to the extent necessary to ensure the ability to share performance of the parenting functions.
g. For any child, residential provisions may contain any reasonable terms or conditions that facilitate the orderly and meaningful exercise of residential time by a parent, including but not limited to requirements of reasonable notice when residential time will not occur.
h. The best interests of the child are ordinarily served when the existing pattern of interaction between a parent and child is altered only to the extent necessitated by the changed relationship of the parents or as required to protect the child from harm.
A parent seeking a temporary order relating to parenting shall file and serve a proposed temporary parenting plan by motion. The other parent, if contesting the proposed temporary parenting plan, shall file and serve a responsive proposed parenting plan. Either parent may move to have a proposed temporary parenting plan entered as part of a temporary order. The parents may enter an agreed temporary parenting plan at any time as part of a temporary order. The proposed temporary parenting plan may be supported by relevant evidence and shall be accompanied by an affidavit or declaration which shall state at a minimum the following:
The name, address, and length of residence with the person or persons with whom the child has lived for the preceding twelve months;
The performance by each parent during the last twelve months of the parenting functions relating to the daily needs of the child;
The parents' work and child-care schedules for the preceding twelve months;
The parents' current work and child-care schedules; and
Any of the circumstances set forth in RCW 26.09.191 or section 2 of this act that are likely to pose a serious risk to the child and that warrant limitation on the award to a parent of temporary residence or time with the child pending entry of a permanent parenting plan.
At the hearing, the court shall enter a temporary parenting order incorporating a temporary parenting plan which includes:
A schedule for the child's time with each parent when appropriate;
Designation of a temporary residence for the child;
Allocation of decision-making authority, if any. Absent allocation of decision-making authority consistent with RCW 26.09.187(2), neither party shall make any decision for the child other than those relating to day-to-day or emergency care of the child, which shall be made by the party who is present with the child;
Provisions for temporary support for the child; and
Restraining orders, if applicable, under RCW 26.09.060.
A parent may make a motion for an order to show cause and the court may enter a temporary order, including a temporary parenting plan, upon a showing of necessity.
A parent may move for amendment of a temporary parenting plan, and the court may order amendment to the temporary parenting plan, if the amendment conforms to the limitations of RCW 26.09.191 and section 2 of this act and is in the best interest of the child.
If a proceeding for dissolution of marriage or dissolution of domestic partnership, legal separation, or declaration of invalidity is dismissed, any temporary order or temporary parenting plan is vacated.
Except as otherwise provided in subsections (4), (5), (6), (8), and (10) of this section, the court shall not modify a prior custody decree or a parenting plan unless it finds, upon the basis of facts that have arisen since the prior decree or plan or that were unknown to the court at the time of the prior decree or plan, that a substantial change has occurred in the circumstances of the child or the nonmoving party and that the modification is in the best interest of the child and is necessary to serve the best interests of the child. The effect of a parent's military duties potentially impacting parenting functions shall not, by itself, be a substantial change of circumstances justifying a permanent modification of a prior decree or plan.
In applying these standards, the court shall retain the residential schedule established by the decree or parenting plan unless:
The parents agree to the modification;
The child has been integrated into the family of the petitioner with the consent of the other parent in substantial deviation from the parenting plan;
The child's present environment is detrimental to the child's physical, mental, or emotional health and the harm likely to be caused by a change of environment is outweighed by the advantage of a change to the child; or
The court has found the nonmoving parent in contempt of court at least twice within three years because the parent failed to comply with the residential time provisions in the court-ordered parenting plan, or the parent has been convicted of custodial interference in the first or second degree under RCW 9A.40.060 or 9A.40.070.
A conviction of custodial interference in the first or second degree under RCW 9A.40.060 or 9A.40.070 shall constitute a substantial change of circumstances for the purposes of this section.
The court may reduce or restrict contact between the child and the parent with whom the child does not reside a majority of the time if it finds that the reduction or restriction would serve and protect the best interests of the child using the criteria in RCW 26.09.191 and section 2 of this act.
The court may order adjustments to the residential aspects of a parenting plan upon a showing of a substantial change in circumstances of either parent or of the child, and without consideration of the factors set forth in subsection (2) of this section, if the proposed modification is only a minor modification in the residential schedule that does not change the residence the child is scheduled to reside in the majority of the time and:
Does not exceed twenty-four full days in a calendar year; or
Is based on a change of residence of the parent with whom the child does not reside the majority of the time or an involuntary change in work schedule by a parent which makes the residential schedule in the parenting plan impractical to follow; or
Does not result in a schedule that exceeds ninety overnights per year in total, if the court finds that, at the time the petition for modification is filed, the decree of dissolution or parenting plan does not provide reasonable time with the parent with whom the child does not reside a majority of the time, and further, the court finds that it is in the best interests of the child to increase residential time with the parent in excess of the residential time period in (a) of this subsection. However, any motion under this subsection (5)(c) is subject to the factors established in subsection (2) of this section if the party bringing the petition has previously been granted a modification under this same subsection within twenty-four months of the current motion. Relief granted under this section shall not be the sole basis for adjusting or modifying child support.
The court may order adjustments to the residential aspects of a parenting plan pursuant to a proceeding to permit or restrain a relocation of the child. The person objecting to the relocation of the child or the relocating person's proposed revised residential schedule may file a petition to modify the parenting plan, including a change of the residence in which the child resides the majority of the time, without a showing of adequate cause other than the proposed relocation itself. A hearing to determine adequate cause for modification shall not be required so long as the request for relocation of the child is being pursued. In making a determination of a modification pursuant to relocation of the child, the court shall first determine whether to permit or restrain the relocation of the child using the procedures and standards provided in RCW 26.09.405 through 26.09.560. Following that determination, the court shall determine what modification pursuant to relocation should be made, if any, to the parenting plan or custody order or visitation order.
A parent with whom the child does not reside a majority of the time and whose residential time with the child is subject to limitations pursuant to RCW 26.09.191 or section 2 of this act may not seek expansion of residential time under subsection (5)(c) of this section unless that parent demonstrates a substantial change in circumstances specifically related to the basis for the limitation.
[Empty]
If a parent with whom the child does not reside a majority of the time voluntarily fails to exercise residential time for an extended period, that is, one year or longer, the court upon proper motion may make adjustments to the parenting plan in keeping with the best interests of the minor child.
For the purposes of determining whether the parent has failed to exercise residential time for one year or longer, the court may not count any time periods during which the parent did not exercise residential time due to the effect of the parent's military duties potentially impacting parenting functions.
A parent with whom the child does not reside a majority of the time who is required by the existing parenting plan to complete evaluations, treatment, parenting, or other classes may not seek expansion of residential time under subsection (5)(c) of this section unless that parent has fully complied with such requirements.
The court may order adjustments to any of the nonresidential aspects of a parenting plan upon a showing of a substantial change of circumstances of either parent or of a child, and the adjustment is in the best interest of the child. Adjustments ordered under this section may be made without consideration of the factors set forth in subsection (2) of this section.
If the parent with whom the child resides a majority of the time receives temporary duty, deployment, activation, or mobilization orders from the military that involve moving a substantial distance away from the parent's residence or otherwise would have a material effect on the parent's ability to exercise parenting functions and primary placement responsibilities, then:
Any temporary custody order for the child during the parent's absence shall end no later than ten days after the returning parent provides notice to the temporary custodian, but shall not impair the discretion of the court to conduct an expedited or emergency hearing for resolution of the child's residential placement upon return of the parent and within ten days of the filing of a motion alleging an immediate danger of irreparable harm to the child. If a motion alleging immediate danger has not been filed, the motion for an order restoring the previous residential schedule shall be granted; and
The temporary duty, activation, mobilization, or deployment and the temporary disruption to the child's schedule shall not be a factor in a determination of change of circumstances if a motion is filed to transfer residential placement from the parent who is a military service member.
If a parent receives military temporary duty, deployment, activation, or mobilization orders that involve moving a substantial distance away from the military parent's residence or otherwise have a material effect on the military parent's ability to exercise residential time or visitation rights, at the request of the military parent, the court may delegate the military parent's residential time or visitation rights, or a portion thereof, to a child's family member, including a stepparent, or another person other than a parent, with a close and substantial relationship to the minor child for the duration of the military parent's absence, if delegating residential time or visitation rights is in the child's best interest. The court may not permit the delegation of residential time or visitation rights to a person who would be subject to limitations on residential time under RCW 26.09.191 or section 2 of this act. The parties shall attempt to resolve disputes regarding delegation of residential time or visitation rights through the dispute resolution process specified in their parenting plan, unless excused by the court for good cause shown. Such a court‑ordered temporary delegation of a military parent's residential time or visitation rights does not create separate rights to residential time or visitation for a person other than a parent.
If the court finds that a motion to modify a prior decree or parenting plan has been brought in bad faith, the court shall assess the attorney's fees and court costs of the nonmoving parent against the moving party.
The person proposing to relocate with the child shall provide his or her reasons for the intended relocation. There is a rebuttable presumption that the intended relocation of the child will be permitted. A person entitled to object to the intended relocation of the child may rebut the presumption by demonstrating that the detrimental effect of the relocation outweighs the benefit of the change to the child and the relocating person, based upon the following factors. The factors listed in this section are not weighted. No inference is to be drawn from the order in which the following factors are listed:
The relative strength, nature, quality, extent of involvement, and stability of the child's relationship with each parent, siblings, and other significant persons in the child's life;
Prior agreements of the parties;
Whether disrupting the contact between the child and the person seeking relocation would be more detrimental to the child than disrupting contact between the child and the person objecting to the relocation;
Whether either parent or a person entitled to residential time with the child is subject to limitations under RCW 26.09.191 or section 2 of this act;
The reasons of each person for seeking or opposing the relocation and the good faith of each of the parties in requesting or opposing the relocation;
The age, developmental stage, and needs of the child, and the likely impact the relocation or its prevention will have on the child's physical, educational, and emotional development, taking into consideration any special needs of the child;
The quality of life, resources, and opportunities available to the child and to the relocating party in the current and proposed geographic locations;
The availability of alternative arrangements to foster and continue the child's relationship with and access to the other parent;
The alternatives to relocation and whether it is feasible and desirable for the other party to relocate also;
The financial impact and logistics of the relocation or its prevention; and
For a temporary order, the amount of time before a final decision can be made at trial.
All guardians ad litem appointed under this title must comply with the training requirements established under RCW 2.56.030(15), prior to their appointment in cases under Title 26 RCW, except that volunteer guardians ad litem or court-appointed special advocates may comply with alternative training requirements approved by the administrative office of the courts that meet or exceed the statewide requirements. In cases involving allegations of limiting factors under RCW 26.09.191 or section 2 of this act, the guardians ad litem appointed under this title must have additional relevant training under RCW 2.56.030(15) when it is available.
[Empty]
Each guardian ad litem program for compensated guardians ad litem shall establish a rotational registry system for the appointment of guardians ad litem under this title. If a judicial district does not have a program the court shall establish the rotational registry system. Guardians ad litem under this title shall be selected from the registry except in exceptional circumstances as determined and documented by the court. The parties may make a joint recommendation for the appointment of a guardian ad litem from the registry.
In judicial districts with a population over one hundred thousand, a list of three names shall be selected from the registry and given to the parties along with the background information record as specified in RCW 26.12.175(3), including their hourly rate for services. Each party may, within three judicial days, strike one name from the list. If more than one name remains on the list, the court shall make the appointment from the names on the list. In the event all three names are stricken the person whose name appears next on the registry shall be appointed.
If a party reasonably believes that the appointed guardian ad litem is inappropriate or unqualified, charges an hourly rate higher than what is reasonable for the particular proceeding, or has a conflict of interest, the party may, within three judicial days from the appointment, move for substitution of the appointed guardian ad litem by filing a motion with the court.
Under this section, within either registry referred to in (a) of this subsection, a subregistry may be created that consists of guardians ad litem under contract with the department of social and health services' division of child support. Guardians ad litem on such a subregistry shall be selected and appointed in state-initiated paternity cases only.
The superior court shall remove any person from the guardian ad litem registry who has been found to have misrepresented his or her qualifications.
The rotational registry system shall not apply to court-appointed special advocate programs.
The definitions in this section apply throughout this chapter unless the context clearly requires otherwise.