SESSION OF 2024
SUPPLEMENTAL NOTE ON HOUSE BILL NO. 2675
As Amended by Senate Committee on Judiciary
Brief*
HB 2675, as amended, would enact the Uniform
Nonparent Visitation Act (UNVA).
Definitions (Section 2)
The bill would define several terms used throughout
UNVA, including:
●“Nonparent” would mean an individual, other than a
parent or person acting as a parent of a child. The
bill would specify the term “nonparent” includes a
grandparent, sibling, or stepparent to a child;
●“Person acting as parent’ would mean a person,
other than a parent, who:
○Has physical custody of the child or has had
physical custody for a period of six
consecutive months, including any temporary
absence, within one year immediately
preceding the commencement of a child
custody proceeding; and
○Has been awarded legal custody by a court or
claims a right to legal custody under the laws
of Kansas;
____________________
*Supplemental notes are prepared by the Legislative Research
Department and do not express legislative intent. The supplemental
note and fiscal note for this bill may be accessed on the Internet at
http://www.kslegislature.org ●“Consistent caretaker” would mean a nonparent
who, without expectation of compensation, meets
the following requirements:
○Lived with the child for no less than 12
months, unless the court finds good cause to
accept a shorter period;
○Regularly exercised care of the child;
○Made day-to-day decisions regarding the child
solely or in cooperation with an individual
having physical custody of the child; and
○Established a bonded and dependent
relationship with the child with the express or
implied consent of a child’s parent or person
acting as a parent or without the consent of a
parent or person acting as a parent if no
parent or person acting as a parent has been
able or willing to perform parenting functions;
and
●“Substantial relationship to the child” would mean a
relationship between a nonparent and child that
meets the following requirements:
○The nonparent is an individual with a familiar
relationship with the child by blood or law or
formed a relationship with the child without
expectation of compensation;
○A significant emotional bond exists between
the nonparent and the child from the child’s
point of view; and
○The nonparent regularly exercised care of the
child and established a bonded and
dependent relationship with the child with the
express or implied consent of a child’s parent
or person acting as a parent or without the
consent of a parent or person acting as a
parent if no parent or person acting as a
2- 2675 parent has been able or willing to perform
parenting functions.
Application of UNVA (Sections 3 and 19)
The UNVA would apply to a proceeding commenced on
or after July 1, 2024, in which a nonparent seeks visitation.
The UNVA would also apply to proceedings commenced
before July 1, 2024, where a final order has not been entered.
The bill would specify UNVA applies when a child has been
appointed a guardian or permanent custodian.
The UNVA would not apply to proceedings:
●Between nonparents, unless a parent or a person
acting as a parent is a party to the proceeding;
●Pertaining to visitation with an Indian child as
defined in the Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978; and
●Pertaining to a child who is subject of an ongoing
proceeding under the Revised Kansas Code for
Care of Children (CINC Code) or a substantially
similar proceeding in another state.
Proceedings to seek visitation under UNVA would not be
allowed for:
●A nonparent seeking visitation solely for serving as
a foster parent of the child; or
●An individual whose parental rights concerning the
child have been terminated. The bill would also bar
proceedings under UNVA during the period of an
order relating to visitation with a child of a deployed
parent or person acting as a parent and would
specify a visitation order entered before such
parent or person acting as a parent was deployed
remains in effect unless modified by the court.
3- 2675 Commencement of Proceeding Under UNVA –
Jurisdiction and Notice (Sections 6 and 9)
The bill would provide that a nonparent could commence
a proceeding under UNVA by filing a petition in the court
having jurisdiction to determine visitation under the Uniform
Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA).
Upon commencement of a proceeding under UNVA, the
nonparent would give notice in the manner described by the
Kansas Code of Civil Procedure to each:
●Parent or person acting as a parent of the child
who is the subject of the proceeding;
●Person having legal custody, residency, or
parenting time with the child;
●Individual having court-ordered visitation with the
child; and
●Attorney, guardian ad litem, or similar
representative appointed to the child.
Petition for Visitation (Section 7)
Under UNVA, a petition for visitation by a nonparent
would be required to allege facts showing:
●The nonparent meets the requirements of a
consistent caretaker of the child; or
●The nonparent has a substantial relationship with
the child and denial of visitation would result in
harm to the child.
The petition would state the relief sought and allege
specific facts showing:
4- 2675 ●The duration and nature of the relationship
between the nonparent and the child, including the
period, if any, the nonparent lived with the child and
the care provided;
●The content of any agreement between the parties
to the proceeding regarding care of the child and
custody of or visitation or other contact with the
child, and if there is such an agreement, it must be
attached to the petition;
●A description of any previous attempt by the
nonparent to obtain visitation or other contact with
the child;
●The extent to which the parent or person acting as
a parent is willing to permit the nonparent to have
visitation or other contact with the child;
●Information about compensation or expectation of
compensation provided to the nonparent in
exchange for care of the child;
●Information required to establish jurisdiction of the
court under the UCCJEA;
●The reason the requested visitation is in the best
interest of the child, applying factors outlined in
UNVA; and
●If the nonparent alleges a substantial relationship
with the child, the reason denial of visitation to the
nonparent would result in harm to the child.
Prima Facie Case for Visitation (Section 8)
If the court determines, based on the petition described
above, a nonparent has not pleaded a prima facie case for
visitation, the court would be required to dismiss the petition.
5- 2675 To plead a prima facie case, the bill would require the
nonparent to show:
●A denial of visitation would harm the child;
●The nonparent has been a consistent caretaker
during the year immediately preceding the filing of
action or has a substantial relationship with the
child; and
●An order of visitation to the nonparent is in the best
interest of the child.
Presumptions (Sections 5 and 12)
The bill would provide that in an initial proceeding under
UNVA, there is a rebuttable presumption that a decision by a
parent or person acting as a parent regarding the nonparent
visitation request is in the best interest of the child. A
nonparent has the burden to rebut the presumption by clear
and convincing evidence of facts related to the request for
visitation. The bill would specify that proof of a parent’s or
person acting as a parent’s unfitness is not required to rebut
the presumption.
The bill would require the court to presume that ordering
visitation for a nonparent is not in the best interest of the child
if the court finds the nonparent or an individual living with the
nonparent has:
●Committed the crime of abuse of a child or
abandonment or aggravated abandonment of a
child;
●Committed a domestic violence offense;
●Committed a sex offense;
●Committed stalking;
6- 2675 ●Been subject to registration requirements under the
Kansas Offender Registration Act (KORA); or
●Committed a comparable offense or has been
subjected to a registration requirement in another
state.
The bill would require the finding to be based on
evidence of a conviction in a criminal proceeding or final
judgment in a civil proceeding or proof by a preponderance of
the evidence.
A nonparent could rebut the presumption by proving
through clear and convincing evidence that ordering visitation
to the nonparent will not endanger the health, safety, or
welfare of the child and is in the child’s best interest.
Order of Visitation (Sections 4, 11, and 14)
A court could order visitation to a nonparent only if the
nonparent proves:
●The denial of visitation would result in harm to the
child;
●The nonparent is or has been a consistent
caretaker within one year of the action’s initiation or
has a substantial relationship with the child; and
●An order of visitation to the nonparent is in the best
interest of the child as determined by the court
considering the following factors:
○Nature and extent of the relationship between
the child and the parent or person acting as a
parent;
○Nature and extent of the relationship between
the child and the nonparent;
7- 2675 ○Past or present conduct by a party or
individual living with a party that poses a risk
to the physical, emotional, or psychological
well-being of the child;
○Likely impact of the requested order on the
relationship between the child and the parent
or person acting as a parent;
○Applicable factors considered in the
determination of legal custody, residency, and
parenting time of the child; and
○Any other factor affecting the best interest of
the child.
The bill would also allow the court to consider the views
of the child, taking into account the age and maturity of the
child, when making an order of visitation.
The court would be required to make findings of fact and
conclusions of law when issuing a final order and state the
reasons for dismissal or denial.
Modification of Orders (Section 13)
The court could modify a final visitation order on a
showing by a preponderance of the evidence that a material
change in circumstance has occurred relevant to the visitation
with the child and modifying the order would be in the best
interest of the child. On agreement of the parties, the court
could modify a visitation order unless the court finds the
agreement is not in the best interest of the child.
Other Court Actions Authorized Under UNVA (Section 10)
To the extent authorized by the Kansas Family Law
Code, the bill would allow the court to:
●Appoint a guardian ad litem for the child;
8- 2675 ●Interview the child if the child is of sufficient age
and maturity;
●Require the parties to participate in mediation or
another form of alternative dispute resolution
excluding parties that are victims of a domestic
violence offense, sex offense, stalking, or other
offense committed by the other party unless
reasonable procedures are in place to protect the
party from a risk of harm, harassment, or
intimidation; or
●Order an evaluation, investigation, or other
assessment of the child’s circumstances and the
effect on the child of ordering or denying the
requested visitation or modifying a visitation order.
Notice of Nonparent Visitation Order to Parent (Section
15)
A nonparent entitled to visitation with a child under
UNVA would be required to give written notice to the parent or
person acting as a parent if the nonparent:
●Is subject to the registration requirements of
KORA or any comparable registration requirements
of another jurisdiction;
●Has been convicted of child abuse under the
Kansas Criminal Code; or
●Is residing with an individual who is known by the
nonparent to be subject to registration
requirements or convicted as described in the bill.
The bill would require notice to be sent by restricted
mail, return receipt requested, to the last known address of
the parent or person acting as a parent within 14 days
following knowledge of an event described above.
9- 2675 Failure to give required notice would be an indirect civil
contempt of court punishable as provided by law. The court
could order the nonparent required to give notice to pay
reasonable attorney fees and any other expenses incurred by
the parent or person acting as a parent as a result of failing to
give notice.
The events described above could also be considered a
material change of circumstances that justify modification of a
prior visitation order.
Expenses of Visitation (Section 16)
Unless the court determines that justice and equity
require otherwise, the nonparent would be required to pay for
the expense of facilitating visitation, including the cost of
transportation, court-ordered services for the child, and costs
and reasonable attorney fees to the parent or person acting
as parent.
Uniformity; Electronic Signatures in Global and National
Commerce Act; Severability (Sections 17–18 and 20)
In applying and construing UNVA, the bill would require
consideration to be given to promoting uniformity of the law
among states that enact UNVA.
The bill would also specify how UNVA interacts with the
Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act.
The bill would include a severability clause stating if any
provision of UNVA is held invalid, the invalidity would not
effect other provisions of UNVA.
10- 2675 Repeal of Third-party Visitation Provisions in Kansas
Family Law Code (Section 21)
The bill would repeal four statutes concerning
grandparent and stepparent visitation rights in the Kansas
Family Law Code, as UNVA would apply to these types of
visitation proceedings, if enacted.
Background
The bill was introduced by the House Committee on
Judiciary at the request of a representative of the Kansas
Judicial Council.
House Committee on Judiciary
In the House Committee hearing, proponent testimony
was provided by a representative of the Kansas Judicial
Council Family Law Advisory Committee. The proponent
generally stated the bill would expand the pool of visitation
applicants to include parties that may be in the best interest
of the child but are not stepparents or grandparents, as
currently allowed by Kansas law.
Written-only proponent testimony was provided by a
private citizen.
No other testimony was provided.
Senate Committee on Judiciary
In the Senate Committee hearing, a representative of
the Kansas Judicial Council Family Law Advisory Committee
and a private citizen provided proponent testimony. The
Judicial Council representative provided substantially similar
testimony as in the House Committee. The private citizen
explained how the provisions of the bill would have allowed
11- 2675 her more control over visitation ordered to her mother-in-law
that was not in the best interest of her children.
Written-only proponent testimony was provided by a
representative of the Kansas Bar Association.
No other testimony was provided.
The Senate Committee amended the bill to:
●Add the phrase “or person acting as a parent” in
provisions that reference parents; and
●Clarify that persons having legal custody,
residency, or parenting time with a child are entitled
to be given notice by the nonparent seeking
visitation.
Fiscal Information
According to the fiscal note prepared by the Division of
Budget on the bill, as introduced, the Office of Judicial
Administration indicates enactment of the bill could increase
the time spent by the Judicial Branch in processing and
hearing cases.
Additionally, the bill could also result in collection of
additional docket fees which would be deposited in the State
General Fund. However, a precise fiscal effect cannot be
determined because the number of additional cases cannot
be estimated.
Any fiscal effect associated with the bill is not reflected
in The FY 2025 Governor’s Budget Report.
Uniform law; Uniform Nonparent Visitation Act; visitation rights; civil procedure; best
interests of the child
12- 2675