H-2033.1 _______________________________________________
SUBSTITUTE HOUSE BILL 1362
_______________________________________________
State of Washington 56th Legislature 1999 Regular Session
By House Committee on Judiciary (originally sponsored by Representatives Kastama, Sheahan, Lantz, Dickerson, Hurst, Edmonds, Constantine, Stensen, Lambert, Carrell, Kessler, Thomas and McIntire)
Read first time 02/24/1999.
AN ACT Relating to residential provisions of permanent parenting plans; amending RCW 26.09.187; and creating a new section.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON:
NEW SECTION. Sec. 1. This act shall be known and may be cited as the friendly parent factor.
Sec. 2. RCW 26.09.187 and 1989 c 375 s 10 are each amended to read as follows:
(1) 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 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:
(a) Differences between the parents that would substantially inhibit their effective participation in any designated process;
(b) The parents' wishes or agreements and, if the parents have entered into agreements, whether the agreements were made knowingly and voluntarily; and
(c) Differences in the parents' financial circumstances that may affect their ability to participate fully in a given dispute resolution process.
(2) ALLOCATION OF DECISION-MAKING AUTHORITY.
(a) 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(4)(a), when it finds that:
(i) The agreement is consistent with any limitations on a parent's decision-making authority mandated by RCW 26.09.191; and
(ii) The agreement is knowing and voluntary.
(b) SOLE DECISION-MAKING AUTHORITY. The court shall order sole decision-making to one parent when it finds that:
(i) A limitation on the other parent's decision-making authority is mandated by RCW 26.09.191;
(ii) Both parents are opposed to mutual decision making;
(iii) One parent is opposed to mutual decision making, and such opposition is reasonable based on the criteria in (c) of this subsection;
(c) 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:
(i) The existence of a limitation under RCW 26.09.191;
(ii) The history of participation of each parent in decision making in each of the areas in RCW 26.09.184(4)(a);
(iii) 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(4)(a); and
(iv) The parents' geographic proximity to one another, to the extent that it affects their ability to make timely mutual decisions.
(3) RESIDENTIAL PROVISIONS.
(((a)))
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 best interests of the child, 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. Where the limitations of RCW 26.09.191 are not dispositive of the
child's residential schedule, the court shall consider the following factors:
(((i)))
(a) The relative strength, nature, and stability of the child's relationship
with each parent((, including));
(b) Whether a parent has taken greater responsibility for performing parenting functions relating to the daily needs of the child;
(((ii)))
(c) The agreements of the parties, provided they were entered into
knowingly and voluntarily;
(((iii)))
(d) Which parent is more likely to allow and encourage the child frequent
and continuing contact with the other parent;
(e) Each parent's past and potential for future performance of parenting functions;
(((iv)))
(f) The emotional needs and developmental level of the child;
(((v)))
(g) 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;
(((vi)))
(h) 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
(((vii)))
(i) Each parent's employment schedule, and shall make accommodations
consistent with those schedules.
Factor
(((i))) (a) shall be given the greatest weight.
(((b)
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 only if the court finds the following:
(i)
No limitation exists under RCW 26.09.191;
(ii)(A)
The parties have agreed to such provisions and the agreement was knowingly and
voluntarily entered into; or
(B)
The parties have a satisfactory history of cooperation and shared performance
of parenting functions; the parties are available to each other, especially in
geographic proximity, to the extent necessary to ensure their ability to share
performance of the parenting functions; and
(iii) The provisions are in the best interests of the child.))
--- END ---