BILL REQ. #: S-1624.6
| State of Washington | 60th Legislature | 2007 Regular Session |
READ FIRST TIME 02/23/07.
AN ACT Relating to dissolution proceedings; amending RCW 26.09.002, 26.12.050, 26.12.060, 26.12.240, 2.56.180, 26.09.020, 26.09.191, 26.12.177, 26.09.015, 26.09.030, 26.09.187, and 26.09.197; reenacting and amending RCW 2.56.030; adding new sections to chapter 26.09 RCW; adding a new section to chapter 26.12 RCW; adding a new section to chapter 2.53 RCW; adding a new section to chapter 26.18 RCW; creating new sections; and making appropriations.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON:
NEW SECTION. Sec. 101 (1) The sum of one million nine hundred
thousand dollars of the general fund--state appropriation for fiscal
year 2008 and one million two hundred thousand dollars of the general
fund--state appropriation for fiscal year 2009 are provided solely to
the administrative office of the courts for the purposes of funding
twenty full-time equivalent positions statewide to provide family court
liaison services and to develop training curricula and provision of
statewide training for family court liaison. The administrative office
of the courts shall develop an equitable funding formula for courthouse
liaison services.
(2) The sum of one million five hundred thousand dollars of the
general fund--state appropriation for fiscal year 2008 and one million
five hundred thousand dollars of the general fund--state appropriation
for fiscal year 2009 are provided solely to the administrative office
of the courts for the purposes of funding mediation services for
dissolution matters as provided in sections 401 and 501 of this act.
The administrative office of the courts shall consult with Resolution
Washington in developing an equitable funding formula to the counties
for mediation services.
(3) The sum of fifty thousand dollars of the general fund--state
appropriation for fiscal year 2008 and fifty thousand dollars of the
general fund--state appropriation for fiscal year 2009 are provided
solely to the administrative office of the courts for the purposes of
developing a residential time summary form and reporting compiled
information as specified in sections 801 and 802 of this act and for
reimbursing the county clerks for copies of the handbook specified in
RCW 2.56.180.
(4) The sum of one hundred thousand dollars of the general fund--state appropriation for fiscal year 2008 and one hundred thousand
dollars of the general fund--state appropriation for fiscal year 2009
are provided solely to the department of social and health services for
the data tracking purposes specified in sections 801 and 802 of this
act.
(5) The sum of three million one hundred thousand dollars of the
general fund--state appropriation for fiscal year 2008 and three
million one hundred thousand dollars of the general fund--state
appropriation for fiscal year 2009 are provided solely to the office of
civil legal aid to enhance funding for qualified legal aid programs for
legal representation of indigent persons in matters relating to
domestic violence in domestic relations and family law matters.
(6) The sum of five hundred thousand dollars of the general fund--state appropriation for fiscal year 2008 and five hundred thousand
dollars of the general fund--state appropriation for fiscal year 2009
are provided solely to the department of community, trade, and economic
development for the development and funding of supervised visitation
and safe exchange centers.
(7) Counties receiving funds from the appropriations in this
section must agree not to use such funds to supplant existing funding
levels for maintenance of the courts.
(8) The sum of three hundred thousand dollars of the general fund--state appropriation for fiscal year 2008 and one hundred fifty thousand
dollars of the general fund--state appropriation for fiscal year 2009
are provided to the supreme court or, if the supreme court does not
establish the task force described in section 405 of this act within
ninety days of the effective date of this section, to the office of
civil legal aid for the sole purpose of administering and supporting
the task force established in section 405 of this act.
Sec. 201 RCW 26.09.002 and 1987 c 460 s 2 are each amended to
read as follows:
Parents have the responsibility to make decisions and perform other
parental functions necessary for the care and growth of their minor
children. In any proceeding between parents under this chapter, the
best interests of the child shall be the standard by which the court
determines and allocates the parties' parental responsibilities. The
state recognizes the fundamental importance of the parent-child
relationship to the welfare of the child, and that the relationship
between the child and each parent should be fostered unless
inconsistent with the child's best interests. Residential time and
financial support are equally important components of parenting
arrangements. The best interests of the child are served by a
parenting arrangement that best maintains a child's emotional growth,
health and stability, and physical care. Further, the best interest of
the child is 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 physical, mental, or emotional harm.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 202 A new section is added to chapter 26.09
RCW to read as follows:
The legislature reaffirms the intent of the current law as
expressed in RCW 26.09.002. However, after review, the legislature
finds that there are certain components of the existing law which do
not support the original legislative intent. In order to better
implement the existing legislative intent the legislature finds that
incentives for parties to reduce family conflict and additional
alternative dispute resolution options can assist in reducing the
number of contested trials. Furthermore, the legislature finds that
the identification of domestic violence as defined in RCW 26.50.010 and
the treatment needs of the parties to dissolutions are necessary to
improve outcomes for children. When judicial officers have the
discretion to tailor individualized resolutions, the legislative intent
expressed in RCW 26.09.002 can more readily be achieved. Judicial
officers should have the discretion and flexibility to assess each case
based on the merits of the individual cases before them.
Sec. 301 RCW 26.12.050 and 1993 c 15 s 1 are each amended to read
as follows:
(1) Except as provided in subsection (2) of this section, in each
county the superior court may appoint the following persons to assist
the family court in disposing of its business:
(a) One or more attorneys to act as family court commissioners, and
(b) Such liaisons, investigators, stenographers, and clerks as the
court shall find necessary to carry on the work of the family court.
(2) The county legislative authority must approve the creation of
family court commissioner positions.
(3) The appointments provided for in this section shall be made by
majority vote of the judges of the superior court of the county and may
be made in addition to all other appointments of commissioners and
other judicial attaches otherwise authorized by law. Family court
commissioners and investigators shall serve at the pleasure of the
judges appointing them and shall receive such compensation as the
county legislative authority shall determine. The appointments may be
full or part-time positions. A person appointed as a family court
commissioner may also be appointed to any other commissioner position
authorized by law.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 302 A new section is added to chapter 26.12
RCW to read as follows:
(1) A county shall create a family court liaison program to provide
basic services to all parties in family law cases. As part of its
responsibility to administer a curriculum of training for family court
liaisons, the administrative office of the courts shall develop a
curriculum and deliver training to enable family court liaisons to
conduct an initial screen for domestic violence as defined in RCW
26.50.010, child abuse and neglect, substance abuse, and mental health
issues and make referrals for comprehensive evaluations as appropriate.
The legislative authority of any county may impose user fees or may
impose a surcharge of up to twenty dollars on only those superior court
cases filed under this title, or both, to pay for the expenses of the
family court liaison program. Fees collected under this section shall
be collected and deposited in the same manner as other county funds are
collected and deposited, and shall be maintained in a separate account
to be used as provided in this section. Family court liaisons shall
provide services to indigent persons at no expense.
(2) The family court liaisons shall: (a) Be the initial point of
contact for parties in family law matters under Title 26 RCW; (b)
provide those parties with information regarding courthouse
facilitation programs and orientations; (c) provide pro se litigants
with information regarding the venue limitations and residency
requirements of this chapter; (d) inform those parties of alternatives
to filing a dissolution petition, such as marriage counseling; (e)
inform those parties of alternatives to litigation including
counseling, legal separation, and mediation services if appropriate;
(f) inform those parties that a search of the judicial information
system for limiting factors under RCW 26.09.191 will be conducted; (g)
review information from the judicial information system to ascertain
whether limiting factors under RCW 26.09.191 apply; (h) report any
information regarding limiting factors to the court; and (i) be
available to assist the court in superior court cases filed under this
title.
Sec. 303 RCW 26.12.060 and 1999 c 397 s 7 are each amended to
read as follows:
The court commissioners shall: (1) Make appropriate referrals to
county family court services program if the county has a family court
services program or appoint a guardian ad litem pursuant to RCW
26.12.175; (2) order investigation and reporting of the facts upon
which to base warrants, subpoenas, orders or directions in actions or
proceedings under this chapter; (3) exercise all the powers and perform
all the duties of court commissioners; (4) make written reports of all
proceedings had which shall become a part of the record of the family
court; (5) provide supervision over the exercise of its jurisdiction as
the judge of the family court may order; (6) cause the orders and
findings of the family court to be entered in the same manner as orders
and findings are entered in cases in the superior court; (7) cause
other reports to be made and records kept as will indicate the value
and extent of reconciliation, mediation, investigation, and treatment
services; ((and)) (8) conduct hearings under Title 13 and chapter
28A.225 RCW, as provided in RCW 13.04.021; and (9) advise all parties
that a person who, knowingly, intentionally, and in bad faith, makes a
false statement to the court may be found guilty of the crime of
perjury.
Sec. 304 RCW 26.12.240 and 2005 c 457 s 15 are each amended to
read as follows:
A county ((may)) shall create a courthouse facilitator program to
provide basic services to pro se litigants in family law cases. The
legislative authority of any county may impose user fees or may impose
a surcharge of up to twenty dollars on only those superior court cases
filed under Title 26 RCW, or both, to pay for the expenses of the
courthouse facilitator program. Fees collected under this section
shall be collected and deposited in the same manner as other county
funds are collected and deposited, and shall be maintained in a
separate account to be used as provided in this section.
Sec. 305 RCW 2.56.180 and 2005 c 282 s 10 are each amended to
read as follows:
(1) The administrative office of the courts shall create a handbook
explaining the sections of Washington law pertaining to the rights and
responsibilities of marital partners to each other and to any children
during a marriage and a dissolution of marriage. The handbook may also
be provided in videotape or other electronic form.
(2) The handbook created under subsection (1) of this section shall
be provided by the county auditor when an individual applies for a
marriage license under RCW 26.04.140.
(3) The handbook created under subsection (1) of this section shall
also be provided to both parties when an individual files a petition
for dissolution pursuant to RCW 26.09.020. The administrative office
of the courts shall on an annual basis reimburse the counties for each
copy of the handbook that is distributed directly to family law parties
under this section, provided that the county submits documentation of
the number of handbooks distributed on an annual basis.
(4) Both parties shall acknowledge, in writing, the receipt of the
family law handbook, information related to alternatives to litigation
including counseling, legal separation, and mediation services, and if
appropriate information regarding supervised visitation and safe
exchange programs prior to entry of a decree of dissolution.
(5) The information contained in the handbook created under
subsection (1) of this section shall be reviewed and updated annually.
The handbook must contain the following information:
(a) Information on prenuptial agreements as contracts and as a
means of structuring financial arrangements and other aspects of the
marital relationship;
(b) Information on shared parental responsibility for children,
including establishing a residential schedule for the child in the
event of the dissolution of the marriage;
(c) Information on notice requirements and standards for parental
relocation;
(d) Information on child support for minor children;
(e) Information on property rights, including equitable
distribution of assets and premarital and postmarital property rights;
(f) Information on spousal maintenance;
(g) Information on domestic violence, child abuse, and neglect,
including penalties;
(h) Information on the court process for dissolution;
(i) Information on the effects of dissolution on children;
(j) Information on community resources that are available to
separating or divorcing persons and their children.
Sec. 306 RCW 26.09.020 and 2001 c 42 s 1 are each amended to read
as follows:
(1) A petition in a proceeding for dissolution of marriage, legal
separation, or for a declaration concerning the validity of a marriage
shall allege:
(a) The last known state of residence of each party, and if a
party's last known state of residence is Washington, the last known
county of residence;
(b) The date and place of the marriage;
(c) If the parties are separated the date on which the separation
occurred;
(d) The names and ages of any child dependent upon either or both
spouses and whether the wife is pregnant;
(e) Any arrangements as to the residential schedule of, decision
making for, dispute resolution for, and support of the children and the
maintenance of a spouse;
(f) A statement specifying whether there is community or separate
property owned by the parties to be disposed of;
(g) A statement specifying that the moving party met with the
family court liaison at least fifteen days prior to filing;
(h) The relief sought.
(2) Either or both parties to the marriage may initiate the
proceeding.
(3) The petitioner shall complete and file with the petition a
certificate under RCW 43.70.150 on the form provided by the department
of health and the confidential information form under RCW 26.23.050.
(4) Nothing in this section shall be construed to limit or prohibit
the ability of parties to obtain appropriate emergency orders.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 401 A new section is added to chapter 26.09
RCW to read as follows:
Mediation is generally inappropriate in cases involving family
violence, child abuse, and neglect. In order to effectively identify
cases where issues of domestic violence, child abuse, and neglect are
present and reduce conflict in dissolution matters: (1) Parties shall
meet with family court liaisons prior to participation in mediation;
(2) where appropriate parties shall be provided access to trained
domestic violence advocates; and (3) in cases where a victim requests
mediation the court may make exceptions and permit mediation, so long
as the court makes a finding that mediation is appropriate under the
circumstances and the victim is permitted to have a supporting person
present during the mediation proceedings.
Sec. 402 RCW 2.56.030 and 2005 c 457 s 7 and 2005 c 282 s 7 are
each reenacted and amended to read as follows:
The administrator for the courts shall, under the supervision and
direction of the chief justice:
(1) Examine the administrative methods and systems employed in the
offices of the judges, clerks, stenographers, and employees of the
courts and make recommendations, through the chief justice, for the
improvement of the same;
(2) Examine the state of the dockets of the courts and determine
the need for assistance by any court;
(3) Make recommendations to the chief justice relating to the
assignment of judges where courts are in need of assistance and carry
out the direction of the chief justice as to the assignments of judges
to counties and districts where the courts are in need of assistance;
(4) Collect and compile statistical and other data and make reports
of the business transacted by the courts and transmit the same to the
chief justice to the end that proper action may be taken in respect
thereto;
(5) Prepare and submit budget estimates of state appropriations
necessary for the maintenance and operation of the judicial system and
make recommendations in respect thereto;
(6) Collect statistical and other data and make reports relating to
the expenditure of public moneys, state and local, for the maintenance
and operation of the judicial system and the offices connected
therewith;
(7) Obtain reports from clerks of courts in accordance with law or
rules adopted by the supreme court of this state on cases and other
judicial business in which action has been delayed beyond periods of
time specified by law or rules of court and make report thereof to
supreme court of this state;
(8) Act as secretary of the judicial conference referred to in RCW
2.56.060;
(9) Submit annually, as of February 1st, to the chief justice, a
report of the activities of the administrator's office for the
preceding calendar year including activities related to courthouse
security;
(10) Administer programs and standards for the training and
education of judicial personnel;
(11) Examine the need for new superior court and district court
judge positions under an objective workload analysis. The results of
the objective workload analysis shall be reviewed by the board for
judicial administration which shall make recommendations to the
legislature. It is the intent of the legislature that an objective
workload analysis become the basis for creating additional district and
superior court positions, and recommendations should address that
objective;
(12) Provide staff to the judicial retirement account plan under
chapter 2.14 RCW;
(13) Attend to such other matters as may be assigned by the supreme
court of this state;
(14) Within available funds, develop a curriculum for a general
understanding of child development, placement, and treatment resources,
as well as specific legal skills and knowledge of relevant statutes
including chapters 13.32A, 13.34, and 13.40 RCW, cases, court rules,
interviewing skills, and special needs of the abused or neglected
child. This curriculum shall be completed and made available to all
juvenile court judges, court personnel, and service providers and be
updated yearly to reflect changes in statutes, court rules, or case
law;
(15) Develop, in consultation with the entities set forth in RCW
2.56.150(3), a comprehensive statewide curriculum for persons who act
as guardians ad litem under Title 13 or 26 RCW. The curriculum shall
be made available July 1, ((1997)) 2008, and include specialty sections
on child development, child sexual abuse, child physical abuse, child
neglect, domestic violence, clinical and forensic investigative and
interviewing techniques, family reconciliation and mediation services,
and relevant statutory and legal requirements. The curriculum shall be
made available to all superior court judges, court personnel, and all
persons who act as guardians ad litem;
(16) Develop a curriculum for a general understanding of crimes of
malicious harassment, as well as specific legal skills and knowledge of
RCW 9A.36.080, relevant cases, court rules, and the special needs of
malicious harassment victims. This curriculum shall be made available
to all superior court and court of appeals judges and to all justices
of the supreme court;
(17) Develop, in consultation with the criminal justice training
commission and the commissions established under chapters 43.113,
43.115, and 43.117 RCW, a curriculum for a general understanding of
ethnic and cultural diversity and its implications for working with
youth of color and their families. The curriculum shall be available
to all superior court judges and court commissioners assigned to
juvenile court, and other court personnel. Ethnic and cultural
diversity training shall be provided annually so as to incorporate
cultural sensitivity and awareness into the daily operation of juvenile
courts statewide;
(18) Authorize the use of closed circuit television and other
electronic equipment in judicial proceedings. The administrator shall
promulgate necessary standards and procedures and shall provide
technical assistance to courts as required;
(19) Develop a Washington family law handbook in accordance with
RCW 2.56.180;
(20) Administer state funds for improving the operation of the
courts and provide support for court coordinating councils, under the
direction of the board for judicial administration;
(21)(a) Administer and distribute amounts appropriated from the
equal justice subaccount under RCW 43.08.250(2) for district court
judges' and qualifying elected municipal court judges' salary
contributions. The administrator for the courts shall develop a
distribution formula for these amounts that does not differentiate
between district and elected municipal court judges.
(b) A city qualifies for state contribution of elected municipal
court judges' salaries under (a) of this subsection if:
(i) The judge is serving in an elected position;
(ii) The city has established by ordinance that a full-time judge
is compensated at a rate equivalent to at least ninety-five percent,
but not more than one hundred percent, of a district court judge salary
or for a part-time judge on a pro rata basis the same equivalent; and
(iii) The city has certified to the office of the administrator for
the courts that the conditions in (b)(i) and (ii) of this subsection
have been met.
Sec. 403 RCW 26.09.191 and 2004 c 38 s 12 are each amended to
read as follows:
(1) The permanent 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 engaged in any of the following
conduct: (a) Willful abandonment that continues for an extended period
of time or substantial refusal to perform parenting functions; (b)
physical, sexual, or a pattern of emotional abuse of a child; or (c) a
history of acts of domestic violence as defined in RCW 26.50.010(1) or
an assault or sexual assault which causes grievous bodily harm or the
fear of such harm.
(2)(a) The parent's residential time with the child shall be
limited if it is found that the parent has engaged in any of the
following conduct: (i) Willful abandonment that continues for an
extended period of time or substantial refusal to perform parenting
functions; (ii) physical, sexual, or a pattern of emotional abuse of a
child; (iii) a history of acts of domestic violence as defined in RCW
26.50.010(1) or an assault or sexual assault which causes grievous
bodily harm or the fear of such harm; or (iv) the parent has been
convicted as an adult of a sex offense under:
(A) RCW 9A.44.076 if, because of the difference in age between the
offender and the victim, no rebuttable presumption exists under (d) of
this subsection;
(B) RCW 9A.44.079 if, because of the difference in age between the
offender and the victim, no rebuttable presumption exists under (d) of
this subsection;
(C) RCW 9A.44.086 if, because of the difference in age between the
offender and the victim, no rebuttable presumption exists under (d) of
this subsection;
(D) RCW 9A.44.089;
(E) RCW 9A.44.093;
(F) RCW 9A.44.096;
(G) RCW 9A.64.020 (1) or (2) if, because of the difference in age
between the offender and the victim, no rebuttable presumption exists
under (d) of this subsection;
(H) Chapter 9.68A RCW;
(I) Any predecessor or antecedent statute for the offenses listed
in (a)(iv)(A) through (H) of this subsection;
(J) Any statute from any other jurisdiction that describes an
offense analogous to the offenses listed in (a)(iv)(A) through (H) of
this subsection.
This subsection (2)(a) shall not apply when (c) or (d) of this
subsection applies.
(b) The parent's residential time with the child shall be limited
if it is found that the parent resides with a person who has engaged in
any of the following conduct: (i) Physical, sexual, or a pattern of
emotional abuse of a child; (ii) a history of acts of domestic violence
as defined in RCW 26.50.010(1) or an assault or sexual assault that
causes grievous bodily harm or the fear of such harm; or (iii) the
person has been convicted as an adult or as a juvenile has been
adjudicated of a sex offense under:
(A) RCW 9A.44.076 if, because of the difference in age between the
offender and the victim, no rebuttable presumption exists under (e) of
this subsection;
(B) RCW 9A.44.079 if, because of the difference in age between the
offender and the victim, no rebuttable presumption exists under (e) of
this subsection;
(C) RCW 9A.44.086 if, because of the difference in age between the
offender and the victim, no rebuttable presumption exists under (e) of
this subsection;
(D) RCW 9A.44.089;
(E) RCW 9A.44.093;
(F) RCW 9A.44.096;
(G) RCW 9A.64.020 (1) or (2) if, because of the difference in age
between the offender and the victim, no rebuttable presumption exists
under (e) of this subsection;
(H) Chapter 9.68A RCW;
(I) Any predecessor or antecedent statute for the offenses listed
in (b)(iii)(A) through (H) of this subsection;
(J) Any statute from any other jurisdiction that describes an
offense analogous to the offenses listed in (b)(iii)(A) through (H) of
this subsection.
This subsection (2)(b) shall not apply when (c) or (e) of this
subsection applies.
(c) If a parent has been found to be a sexual 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 sexual
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 that
person's presence.
(d) There is a rebuttable presumption that a parent who has been
convicted as an adult of a sex offense listed in (d)(i) through (ix) of
this subsection poses a present danger to a child. Unless the parent
rebuts this presumption, the court shall restrain the parent from
contact with a child that would otherwise be allowed under this
chapter:
(i) RCW 9A.64.020 (1) or (2), provided that the person convicted
was at least five years older than the other person;
(ii) RCW 9A.44.073;
(iii) RCW 9A.44.076, provided that the person convicted was at
least eight years older than the victim;
(iv) RCW 9A.44.079, provided that the person convicted was at least
eight years older than the victim;
(v) RCW 9A.44.083;
(vi) RCW 9A.44.086, provided that the person convicted was at least
eight years older than the victim;
(vii) RCW 9A.44.100;
(viii) Any predecessor or antecedent statute for the offenses
listed in (d)(i) through (vii) of this subsection;
(ix) Any statute from any other jurisdiction that describes an
offense analogous to the offenses listed in (d)(i) through (vii) of
this subsection.
(e) There is a rebuttable presumption that a parent who resides
with a person who, as an adult, has been convicted, or as a juvenile
has been adjudicated, of the sex offenses listed in (e)(i) through (ix)
of this subsection 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:
(i) RCW 9A.64.020 (1) or (2), provided that the person convicted
was at least five years older than the other person;
(ii) RCW 9A.44.073;
(iii) RCW 9A.44.076, provided that the person convicted was at
least eight years older than the victim;
(iv) RCW 9A.44.079, provided that the person convicted was at least
eight years older than the victim;
(v) RCW 9A.44.083;
(vi) RCW 9A.44.086, provided that the person convicted was at least
eight years older than the victim;
(vii) RCW 9A.44.100;
(viii) Any predecessor or antecedent statute for the offenses
listed in (e)(i) through (vii) of this subsection;
(ix) Any statute from any other jurisdiction that describes an
offense analogous to the offenses listed in (e)(i) through (vii) of
this subsection.
(f) The presumption established in (d) of this subsection may be
rebutted only after a written finding that:
(i) If the child was not the victim of the sex offense committed by
the parent requesting residential time, (A) contact between the child
and the offending parent is appropriate and poses minimal risk to the
child, and (B) the offending parent has successfully engaged in
treatment for sex offenders or is engaged in and making progress in
such treatment, if any was ordered by a court, and the treatment
provider believes such contact is appropriate and poses minimal risk to
the child; or
(ii) If the child was the victim of the sex offense committed by
the parent requesting residential time, (A) contact between the child
and the offending parent is appropriate and poses minimal risk to the
child, (B) if the child is in or has been in therapy for victims of
sexual abuse, the child's counselor believes such contact between the
child and the offending parent is in the child's best interest, and (C)
the offending parent has successfully engaged in treatment for sex
offenders or is engaged in and making progress in such treatment, if
any was ordered by a court, and the treatment provider believes such
contact is appropriate and poses minimal risk to the child.
(g) The presumption established in (e) of this subsection may be
rebutted only after a written finding that:
(i) If the child was not the victim of the sex offense committed by
the person who is residing with the parent requesting residential time,
(A) 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 (B) the convicted or adjudicated person has successfully
engaged in treatment for sex offenders or is engaged in and making
progress in such treatment, if any was ordered by a court, and the
treatment provider believes such contact is appropriate and poses
minimal risk to the child; or
(ii) If the child was the victim of the sex offense committed by
the person who is residing with the parent requesting residential time,
(A) contact between the child and the parent in the presence of the
convicted or adjudicated person is appropriate and poses minimal risk
to the child, (B) if the child is in or has been in therapy for victims
of sexual abuse, the child's counselor believes such contact between
the child and the parent residing with the convicted or adjudicated
person in the presence of the convicted or adjudicated person is in the
child's best interest, and (C) the convicted or adjudicated person has
successfully engaged in treatment for sex offenders or is engaged in
and making progress in such treatment, if any was ordered by a court,
and the treatment provider believes contact between the parent and
child in the presence of the convicted or adjudicated person is
appropriate and poses minimal risk to the child.
(h) If the court finds that the parent has met the burden of
rebutting the presumption under (f) of this subsection, the court may
allow a parent who has been convicted as an adult of a sex offense
listed in (d)(i) through (ix) of this subsection to have residential
time with the child supervised by a neutral and independent adult and
pursuant to an adequate plan for supervision of such residential time.
The court shall not approve of a supervisor for contact between the
child and the parent unless the court finds, based on the evidence,
that the supervisor is willing and capable of protecting the child from
harm. The court shall revoke court approval of the supervisor 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.
(i) If the court finds that the parent has met the burden of
rebutting the presumption under (g) of this subsection, the court may
allow a parent residing with a person who has been adjudicated as a
juvenile of a sex offense listed in (e)(i) through (ix) of this
subsection to have residential time with the child in the presence of
the person adjudicated as a juvenile, supervised by a neutral and
independent adult and pursuant to an adequate plan for supervision of
such residential time. The court shall not approve of a supervisor for
contact between the child and the parent unless the court finds, based
on the evidence, that the supervisor is willing and capable of
protecting the child from harm. The court shall revoke court approval
of the supervisor 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.
(j) If the court finds that the parent has met the burden of
rebutting the presumption under (g) of this subsection, the court may
allow a parent residing with a person who, as an adult, has been
convicted of a sex offense listed in (e)(i) through (ix) of this
subsection to have residential time with the child in the presence of
the convicted person supervised by a neutral and independent adult and
pursuant to an adequate plan for supervision of such residential time.
The court shall not approve of a supervisor for contact between the
child and the parent unless the court finds, based on the evidence,
that the supervisor is willing and capable of protecting the child from
harm. The court shall revoke court approval of the supervisor 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.
(k) 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. A court may order unsupervised contact between
the offending parent and a child who was not sexually abused by the
parent after the presumption under (d) of this subsection has been
rebutted and supervised residential time has occurred for at least two
years with no further arrests or convictions of sex offenses involving
children under chapter 9A.44 RCW, RCW 9A.64.020, or chapter 9.68A RCW
and (i) the sex offense of the offending parent was not committed
against a child of the offending parent, and (ii) the court finds that
unsupervised contact between the child and the offending parent is
appropriate and poses minimal risk to the child, after consideration of
the testimony of a state-certified therapist, mental health counselor,
or social worker with expertise in treating child sexual abuse victims
who has supervised at least one period of residential time between the
parent and the child, and after consideration of evidence of the
offending parent's compliance with community supervision requirements,
if any. If the offending parent was not ordered by a court to
participate in treatment for sex offenders, then the parent shall
obtain a psychosexual evaluation conducted by a certified sex offender
treatment provider or a certified affiliate sex offender treatment
provider indicating that the offender has the lowest likelihood of risk
to reoffend before the court grants unsupervised contact between the
parent and a child.
(l) A court may order unsupervised contact between the parent and
a child which may occur in the presence of a juvenile adjudicated of a
sex offense listed in (e)(i) through (ix) of this subsection who
resides with the parent after the presumption under (e) of this
subsection has been rebutted and supervised residential time has
occurred for at least two years during which time the adjudicated
juvenile has had no further arrests, adjudications, or convictions of
sex offenses involving children under chapter 9A.44 RCW, RCW 9A.64.020,
or chapter 9.68A RCW, and (i) the court finds that unsupervised contact
between the child and the parent that may occur in the presence of the
adjudicated juvenile is appropriate and poses minimal risk to the
child, after consideration of the testimony of a state-certified
therapist, mental health counselor, or social worker with expertise in
treatment of child sexual abuse victims who has supervised at least one
period of residential time between the parent and the child in the
presence of the adjudicated juvenile, and after consideration of
evidence of the adjudicated juvenile's compliance with community
supervision or parole requirements, if any. If the adjudicated
juvenile was not ordered by a court to participate in treatment for sex
offenders, then the adjudicated juvenile shall obtain a psychosexual
evaluation conducted by a certified sex offender treatment provider or
a certified affiliate sex offender treatment provider indicating that
the adjudicated juvenile has the lowest likelihood of risk to reoffend
before the court grants unsupervised contact between the parent and a
child which may occur in the presence of the adjudicated juvenile who
is residing with the parent.
(m)(i) The limitations imposed by the court under (a) or (b) of
this subsection shall be reasonably calculated to protect the child
from the physical, sexual, or emotional abuse or harm that could result
if the 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 parent requesting residential time. The limitations the court
may impose include, but are not limited to: Supervised contact between
the child and the parent or completion of relevant counseling or
treatment. If the court expressly finds based on the evidence that
limitations on the residential time with the child will not adequately
protect the child from the harm or abuse that could result if the child
has contact with the parent requesting residential time, the court
shall restrain the parent requesting residential time from all contact
with the child.
(ii) The court shall not enter an order under (a) of this
subsection allowing a parent to have contact with a child if the parent
has been found by clear and convincing evidence in a civil action or by
a preponderance of the evidence in a dependency action to have sexually
abused the child, except upon recommendation by an evaluator or
therapist for the child that the child is ready for contact with the
parent and will not be harmed by the contact. 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 clear and convincing evidence in a civil action or by a
preponderance of the evidence in a dependency action 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.
(iii) If the court limits residential time under (a) or (b) of this
subsection to require supervised contact between the child and the
parent, the court shall not approve of a supervisor for contact between
a child and a parent who has engaged in physical, sexual, or a pattern
of emotional abuse of the child unless the court finds based upon the
evidence that the supervisor accepts that the harmful conduct occurred
and is willing to and capable of protecting the child from harm. The
court shall revoke court approval of the supervisor upon finding, based
on the evidence, that the supervisor has failed to protect the child or
is no longer willing to or capable of protecting the child.
(n) If the court expressly finds based on the evidence that
contact between the parent and the child will not cause physical,
sexual, or emotional abuse or harm to the child and that the
probability that the parent's or other person's harmful or abusive
conduct will recur is so remote that it would not be in the child's
best interests to apply the limitations of (a), (b), and (m)(i) and
(iii) of this subsection, or if the court expressly finds that the
parent's conduct did not have an impact on the child, then the court
need not apply the limitations of (a), (b), and (m)(i) and (iii) of
this subsection. The weight given to the existence of a protection
order issued under chapter 26.50 RCW as to domestic violence is within
the discretion of the court. This subsection shall not apply when (c),
(d), (e), (f), (g), (h), (i), (j), (k), (l), and (m)(ii) of this
subsection apply.
(3) A parent's involvement or conduct may have an adverse effect on
the child's best interests, and the court may preclude or limit any
provisions of the parenting plan, if any of the following factors
exist:
(a) A parent's neglect or substantial nonperformance of parenting
functions;
(b) A long-term emotional or physical impairment which interferes
with the parent's performance of parenting functions as defined in RCW
26.09.004;
(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;
(e) The abusive use of conflict by the parent which creates the
danger of serious damage to the child's psychological development;
(f) A parent has withheld from the other parent access to the child
for a protracted period without good cause; or
(g) Such other factors or conduct as the court expressly finds
adverse to the best interests of the child.
(4) In cases involving allegations of limiting factors under
subsection (2) (a)(ii), (iii), or (iv) of this section, both parties
shall be screened to determine the appropriateness of a comprehensive
assessment regarding the impact of the limiting factor on the child and
the parties.
(5) If any of the factors in this section exist, the court shall
require that a safety plan be completed and filed with the court.
(6) In entering a permanent parenting plan, the court shall not
draw any presumptions from the provisions of the temporary parenting
plan.
(((5))) (7) In determining whether any of the conduct described in
this section has occurred, the court shall apply the civil rules of
evidence, proof, and procedure.
(((6))) (8) For the purposes of this section, a parent's child
means that parent's natural child, adopted child, or stepchild.
Sec. 404 RCW 26.12.177 and 2005 c 282 s 30 are each amended to
read as follows:
(1) All guardians ad litem and investigators 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, the guardians ad litem and investigators
appointed under this title must have additional training under RCW
2.56.030(15) when it is available.
(2)(a) Each guardian ad litem program for compensated guardians ad
litem shall establish a rotational registry system for the appointment
of guardians ad litem and investigators under this title. If a
judicial district does not have a program the court shall establish the
rotational registry system. Guardians ad litem and investigators 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.
(b) 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 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.
(c) If a party reasonably believes that the appointed guardian ad
litem lacks the necessary expertise for the proceeding, 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.
(d) 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.
(e) The superior court shall remove any person from the guardian ad
litem registry who misrepresents his or her qualifications pursuant to
a grievance procedure established by the court.
(3) The rotational registry system shall not apply to court-appointed special advocate programs.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 405 A new section is added to chapter 2.53 RCW
to read as follows:
(1) The legislature requests that the supreme court convene and
support a task force to establish statewide protocols for dissolution
cases. If the supreme court does not convene a task force along the
lines set forth in this section within ninety days of the effective
date of this section, such task force shall be convened and supported
by the office of civil legal aid. The task force shall develop: (a)
Clear and concise dispute resolution procedures; (b) in conjunction
with the office of crime victims advocacy, a sexual assault training
curriculum; (c) consistent standards for parenting evaluators; and (d)
a domestic violence training curriculum for individuals making
evaluations in dissolution cases. The task force shall make
recommendations concerning specialized evaluators for dissolution
cases, dissolution forms and procedures, and fees.
(2) The governor shall appoint the following members of the
workgroup:
(a) A representative of the office of crime victims advocacy;
(b) A professor of law specializing in family law;
(c) A representative from a statewide domestic violence advocacy
group;
(d) A representative from a community sexual assault program;
(e) Two noncustodial parents with at least one representing the
interests of low-income noncustodial parents; and
(f) Two custodial parents with at least one representing the
interests of low-income custodial parents.
(3) The chief justice of the supreme court is requested to appoint
the following members of the task force:
(a) Two representatives from the superior court judges association,
including a superior court judge and a court commissioner who is
familiar with dissolution issues;
(b) A representative from the administrative office of the courts;
(c) A representative from the Washington state bar association's
family law executive committee;
(d) A representative from a qualified legal aid provider that
receives funding from the office of civil legal aid;
(e) A representative of the Washington state association of county
clerks; and
(f) A guardian ad litem.
(4) The president of the senate shall appoint one member from each
of the two largest caucuses of the senate.
(5) The speaker of the house of representatives shall appoint one
member from each of the two largest caucuses of the house of
representatives, with at least one member.
(6) Membership of the task force may also include members of the
civil legal aid oversight committee, including but not limited to the
legislative members of the committee.
(7) The supreme court or, in the event the supreme court does not
convene the task force within ninety days of the effective date of this
section, the office of civil legal aid shall provide staff support to
the task force, and shall carefully consider all input received from
interested organizations and individuals during the review process.
(8) The task force may form an executive committee, create
subcommittees, designate alternative representatives, and define other
procedures, as needed, for operation of the task force.
(9) Legislative members of the task force shall be reimbursed for
travel expenses under RCW 44.04.120. Nonlegislative members, except
those representing an employee or organization, are entitled to be
reimbursed for travel expenses in accordance with RCW 43.03.050 and
43.03.060.
(10) The task force shall present preliminary findings and
conclusions to the governor's office, the supreme court, and the
appropriate committees of the legislature by September 1, 2008. A
final report and recommendations, including recommendations for
legislative action, if necessary, shall be completed by December 1,
2008.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 501 A new section is added to chapter 26.09
RCW to read as follows:
In order to provide judicial officers with better information and
to facilitate decision making which allows for the protection of
children from physical, mental, or emotional harm and in order to
facilitate consistent healthy contact between both parents and their
children:
(1) Parties and witnesses who require the assistance of
interpreters shall be provided access to qualified interpreters
pursuant to chapter 2.42 or 2.43 RCW. To the extent practicable and
within available resources, interpreters shall also be made available
at dissolution-related proceedings.
(2) Parties and witnesses who require literacy assistance shall be
referred to the multipurpose service centers established in chapter
28B.04 RCW.
(3) In matters involving guardian ad litems, the court shall
specify the hourly rate the guardian ad litem may charge for his or her
services, and shall specify the maximum amount the guardian ad litem
may charge without additional review. Indigent parties shall be
provided with guardian ad litem services at no expense.
(4) Parties may request to participate by telephone or interactive
videoconference. The court may allow telephonic or interactive
videoconference participation of one or more parties at any proceeding
in its discretion. The court may also allow telephonic or interactive
videoconference participation of witnesses.
(5) In cases involving domestic violence, child abuse, and neglect,
if residential time is ordered, the court may:
(a) Order exchange of a child to occur in a protected setting;
(b) Order residential time supervised by a neutral and independent
adult and pursuant to an adequate plan for supervision of such
residential time. The court shall not approve of a supervisor for
contact between the child and the parent unless the court finds, based
on the evidence, that the supervisor is willing to and capable of
protecting the child from harm. The court shall revoke court approval
of the supervisor 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. If the court allows a family or
household member to supervise residential time, the court shall
establish conditions to be followed during residential time.
(6) In cases in which the court finds that the parties do not have
a satisfactory history of cooperation or a high level of parental
conflict, supervised visitation and safe exchange centers or
alternative safe locations shall be utilized to facilitate the exercise
of residential time if ordered.
Sec. 601 RCW 26.09.015 and 2005 c 172 s 17 are each amended to
read as follows:
(1) In any proceeding under this chapter, the matter may be set for
mediation of the contested issues before or concurrent with the setting
of the matter for hearing. The purpose of the mediation proceeding
shall be to reduce acrimony which may exist between the parties and to
develop an agreement assuring the child's close and continuing contact
with both parents after the marriage is dissolved. The mediator shall
use his or her best efforts to effect a settlement of the dispute.
(2) In any proceeding involving issues relating to residential time
or other matters governed by a parenting plan, the matter may be set
for mediation of the contested issues before or concurrent with the
setting of the matter for hearing. Both predecree and postdecree
mediation shall be provided at no expense to the parties within one
year of the filing of the dissolution petition.
(3) Each superior court ((may)) shall make available a mediator.
The court shall use the most cost-effective mediation services which
are readily available unless there is good cause to access alternative
providers. The mediator may be a member of the professional staff of
a family court or mental health services agency, or may be any other
person or agency designated by the court. In order to provide
mediation services, the court is not required to institute a family
court.
(((3))) (4)(a) Mediation proceedings under this chapter shall be
governed in all respects by chapter 7.07 RCW, except as follows:
(i) Mediation communications in postdecree mediations mandated by
a parenting plan are admissible in subsequent proceedings for the
limited purpose of proving:
(A) Abuse, neglect, abandonment, exploitation, or unlawful
harassment as defined in RCW 9A.46.020(1), of a child;
(B) Abuse or unlawful harassment as defined in RCW 9A.46.020(1), of
a family or household member as defined in RCW 26.50.010(2); or
(C) That a parent used or frustrated the dispute resolution process
without good reason for purposes of RCW 26.09.184(3)(d).
(ii) If a postdecree mediation-arbitration proceeding is required
pursuant to a parenting plan and the same person acts as both mediator
and arbitrator, mediation communications in the mediation phase of such
a proceeding may be admitted during the arbitration phase, and shall be
admissible in the judicial review of such a proceeding under RCW
26.09.184(3)(e) to the extent necessary for such review to be
effective.
(b) None of the exceptions under (a)(i) and (ii) of this subsection
shall subject a mediator to compulsory process to testify except by
court order for good cause shown, taking into consideration the need
for the mediator's testimony and the interest in the mediator
maintaining an appearance of impartiality. If a mediation
communication is not privileged under (a)(i) of this subsection or that
portion of (a)(ii) of this subsection pertaining to judicial review,
only the portion of the communication necessary for the application of
the exception may be admitted, and such admission of evidence shall not
render any other mediation communication discoverable or admissible
except as may be provided in chapter 7.07 RCW.
(((4))) (5) The mediator shall assess the needs and interests of
the child or children involved in the controversy and may interview the
child or children if the mediator deems such interview appropriate or
necessary.
(((5))) (6) Any agreement reached by the parties as a result of
mediation shall be reported to the court and to counsel for the parties
by the mediator on the day set for mediation or any time thereafter
designated by the court.
(7) Parties who choose to participate in good faith in the
mediation process within one month of filing a dissolution petition
remain eligible to finalize the dissolution ninety days after the date
of filing. In addition, any fees paid for family court liaison
services shall be refunded to the parties.
Sec. 701 RCW 26.09.030 and 2005 c 55 s 1 are each amended to read
as follows:
(1) When a party who (((1))) is:
(a) A resident of this state((, or (2) is));
(b) A member of the armed forces and is stationed in this
state((,)); or (((3) is))
(c) Married to a party who is a resident of this state or who is a
member of the armed forces and is stationed in this state,
petitions for a dissolution of marriage, and alleges that the marriage
is irretrievably broken and when ninety days have elapsed since the
petition was filed and from the date when service of summons was made
upon the respondent or the first publication of summons was made, the
court shall proceed as follows:
(((a))) (i) If the other party joins in the petition or does not
deny that the marriage is irretrievably broken, the court shall enter
a decree of dissolution.
(((b))) (ii) If the other party alleges that the petitioner was
induced to file the petition by fraud, or coercion, the court shall
make a finding as to that allegation and, if it so finds shall dismiss
the petition.
(((c))) (iii) If the other party denies that the marriage is
irretrievably broken the court shall consider all relevant factors,
including the circumstances that gave rise to the filing of the
petition and the prospects for reconciliation and shall:
(((i))) (A) Make a finding that the marriage is irretrievably
broken and enter a decree of dissolution of the marriage; or
(((ii))) (B) At the request of either party or on its own motion,
transfer the cause to the family court, refer them to another
counseling service of their choice, and request a report back from the
counseling service within sixty days, or continue the matter for not
more than sixty days for hearing. If the cause is returned from the
family court or at the adjourned hearing, the court shall:
(((A))) (I) Find that the parties have agreed to reconciliation and
dismiss the petition; or
(((B))) (II) Find that the parties have not been reconciled, and
that either party continues to allege that the marriage is
irretrievably broken. When such facts are found, the court shall enter
a decree of dissolution of the marriage.
(((d))) (iv) If the petitioner requests the court to decree legal
separation in lieu of dissolution, the court shall enter the decree in
that form unless the other party objects and petitions for a decree of
dissolution or declaration of invalidity.
(((e))) (v) In considering a petition for dissolution of marriage,
a court shall not use a party's pregnancy as the sole basis for denying
or delaying the entry of a decree of dissolution of marriage. Granting
a decree of dissolution of marriage when a party is pregnant does not
affect further proceedings under the uniform parentage act, chapter
26.26 RCW.
(2) If the petitioner files in a county other than the county of
residence of either party or the child, the summons shall be served
upon the nonmoving party personally.
(3) A party may only file a modification in the county where the
petition for dissolution was filed, if the petition was filed after the
effective date of this section. Exceptions shall be made only if one
of the parties has moved to another county subsequent to the initial
filing, in which case the modification may be filed in the county where
one of the parties is now domiciled.
Sec. 702 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 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) The relative strength, nature, and stability of the child's
relationship with each parent((, including whether a parent has taken
greater responsibility for performing parenting functions relating to
the daily needs of the child));
(ii) The agreements of the parties, provided they were entered into
knowingly and voluntarily;
(iii) Each parent's past and potential for future performance of
parenting functions as defined in RCW 26.09.004(3), including whether
a parent has taken greater responsibility for performing parenting
functions relating to the daily needs of the child;
(iv) The emotional needs and developmental level of the child;
(v) 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) 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) Each parent's employment schedule, and shall make
accommodations consistent with those schedules.
Factor (i) 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:)) 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.
(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
(c) 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.
Sec. 703 RCW 26.09.197 and 1987 c 460 s 14 are each amended to
read as follows:
After considering the affidavit required by RCW 26.09.194(1) and
other relevant evidence presented, the court shall make a temporary
parenting plan that is in the best interest of the child. In making
this determination, the court shall give particular consideration to:
(1) ((Which parent has taken greater responsibility during the last
twelve months for performing parenting functions relating to the daily
needs of the child)) The relative strength, nature, and stability of
the child's relationship with each parent; and
(2) Which parenting arrangements will cause the least disruption to
the child's emotional stability while the action is pending.
The court shall also consider the factors used to determine
residential provisions in the permanent parenting plan.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 801 A new section is added to chapter 26.09
RCW to read as follows:
The parties to dissolution matters shall file with the clerk of the
court the residential time summary report. The summary report shall be
on the form developed by the administrative office of the courts in
consultation with the department of social and health services division
of child support. The parties must complete the form and file the form
with the court order. The clerk of the court must forward the form to
the division of child support on at least a monthly basis.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 802 A new section is added to chapter 26.18
RCW to read as follows:
(1) The administrative office of the courts in consultation with
the department of social and health services, division of child
support, shall develop a residential time summary report form to
provide for the reporting of summary information in every case in which
residential time with children is to be established or modified.
(2) The residential time summary report must include at a minimum:
A breakdown of residential schedules with a reasonable degree of
specificity regarding actual time with each parent, including
enforcement practices, representation status of the parties, whether
domestic violence, child abuse or neglect, chemical dependency, or
mental health issues exist, and whether the matter was agreed or
contested.
(3) The division of child support shall compile and electronically
transmit the information in the residential time summary reports to the
administrative office of the courts for purposes of tracking
residential time awards by parent, enforcement practices,
representation status of the parties, the existence of domestic
violence, child abuse or neglect, chemical dependency, or mental health
issues and whether the matter was agreed or contested.
(4) The administrative office of the courts shall report the
compiled information organized by a judicial officer on at least an
annual basis. These reports shall be made publicly available through
the judicial information public access services.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 901 Part headings used in this act are not any
part of the law.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 902 If specific funding for the purposes of
this act, referencing this act by bill or chapter number, is not
provided by June 30, 2007, in the omnibus appropriations act, this act
is null and void.