Relative to the determination of parental rights and responsibilities based on shared parenting and shared access to the child's records.
Impact
The enactment of HB185 is expected to influence the balance of parental rights in custody disputes. By presuming that equal parenting time is beneficial, the bill could potentially reduce the instances of parental conflict during custody proceedings. However, it also presents the risk of courts facing challenges in determining what constitutes as 'best interests' when oral agreements and varying family dynamics come into play. Previous norms may shift as parents navigate these new prescriptive guidelines, which could lead to a notable increase in custody-related litigation as interpretations of this presumption evolve.
Summary
House Bill 185 introduces an important amendment to the existing family law framework in New Hampshire by establishing a presumption in favor of equal parenting time between parents. The bill aims to enhance the determination of parental rights and responsibilities based on the idea of shared parenting, which proponents argue will better serve the best interests of the child. Under this bill, courts are required to consider that equal parenting time aligns with a child's welfare unless compelling evidence suggests otherwise.
Sentiment
Overall sentiment surrounding HB185 appears to be mixed. Supporters of the bill, including various family advocates, praise it for promoting collaborative parenting approaches and improving child wellness outcomes. They believe it aligns with contemporary views on co-parenting efficacy. Conversely, critics argue that the presumption might not suit all cases, particularly in instances of high conflict or instances involving domestic violence, where equal time may not be in the child's best interest. They emphasize that such a default presumption could undermine tailored responses to specific familial situations.
Contention
Notable points of contention within discussions surrounding HB185 focus on the rebuttal conditions established in the bill, which outline scenarios where the presumption can be challenged. Some expressed concerns that these criteria may not sufficiently protect children in potentially harmful situations. Additionally, the bill's impact on the judicial system's workload, with respect to increased litigation resulting from the ambiguity of 'best interest' determinations, raises questions about practicality and necessary supports for affected families.
Relative to the determination of parental rights and responsibilities based on shared parenting and requiring all municipalities and school governing bodies to post on their official website the amount of funds received by the state either by allocation or grant.