Prohibits visitation rights between a family member and a child if the court finds that the family member's criminal conduct resulted in the death of a parent of the child. (gov sig) (RE1 NO IMPACT GF EX See Note)
If enacted, SB132 will have significant implications for state laws governing child custody and visitation rights. It modifies existing statutes to systematically prevent specific individuals from obtaining visitation under defined circumstances. This marks a strong legislative move toward prioritizing the safety and best interests of children over the rights of potentially harmful family members. The law reinforces the notion that certain criminal activities should preclude individuals from having any involvement in the child's life, thus promoting safer environments for children across Louisiana.
Senate Bill No. 132, introduced by Senator Morrell, seeks to amend Civil Code Article 137 in relation to visitation rights concerning children. The bill explicitly denies visitation rights to a natural parent or family member who has engaged in certain criminal behaviors, particularly in cases of felony rape or where the family member's actions led to the death of the child's parent. The legislation is intended to protect the welfare of children by ensuring that individuals who have committed severe offenses do not have the opportunity to establish contact or visitation that could be harmful to the child's emotional or psychological well-being.
The sentiment surrounding the bill appears to align with strong protective instincts regarding child welfare. Supporters of SB132 advocate for the necessity of such measures to safeguard children from potential exposure to individuals who have committed grave offenses, asserting that the legislation is a rightful enhancement of child protection laws. Conversely, there may be concerns about the blanket denial of visitation rights and its implications on family relationships, highlighting a potential debate around the balance between protecting children and upholding family ties, even in complex circumstances.
Notable points of contention regarding SB132 could arise from discussions about the implications of defining criminal conduct and the evidentiary standards required for denying visitation. Critics of the bill may express concern about the broad application of the law and whether it could inadvertently strip rights from individuals who are reformed or pose no current risk. Furthermore, the delineation of 'criminal conduct' and its specific effects on visitation rights raises questions about the legal process involved in determining such rights, potentially leading to disputes during custody hearings.