Florida Senate - 2023                      CS for CS for SB 1292
       
       
        
       By the Committees on Rules; and Children, Families, and Elder
       Affairs; and Senator Jones
       
       
       
       
       595-04051-23                                          20231292c2
    1                        A bill to be entitled                      
    2         An act relating to parenting plans; amending s. 61.13,
    3         F.S.; creating a presumption that equal time-sharing
    4         is in the best interests of the child, with
    5         exceptions; establishing the manner by which such
    6         presumption may be rebutted; requiring the court to
    7         evaluate certain factors and make specific written
    8         findings of fact under certain circumstances; revising
    9         requirements regarding modifying parental
   10         responsibility, a parenting plan, or a time-sharing
   11         schedule; authorizing the court to consider, under
   12         certain circumstances, a specified move of a parent to
   13         be a substantial and material change in circumstances
   14         for certain purposes; providing an effective date.
   15          
   16  Be It Enacted by the Legislature of the State of Florida:
   17  
   18         Section 1. Paragraph (c) of subsection (2) and subsection
   19  (3) of section 61.13, Florida Statutes, are amended to read:
   20         61.13 Support of children; parenting and time-sharing;
   21  powers of court.—
   22         (2)
   23         (c) The court shall determine all matters relating to
   24  parenting and time-sharing of each minor child of the parties in
   25  accordance with the best interests of the child and in
   26  accordance with the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and
   27  Enforcement Act, except that modification of a parenting plan
   28  and time-sharing schedule requires a showing of a substantial,
   29  material, and unanticipated change of circumstances.
   30         1. It is the public policy of this state that each minor
   31  child has frequent and continuing contact with both parents
   32  after the parents separate or the marriage of the parties is
   33  dissolved and to encourage parents to share the rights and
   34  responsibilities, and joys, of childrearing. Unless Except as
   35  otherwise provided in this section or agreed to by the parties
   36  paragraph, there is a rebuttable no presumption that equal for
   37  or against the father or mother of the child or for or against
   38  any specific time-sharing of a minor child is in the best
   39  interests of the minor child. To rebut this presumption, a party
   40  must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that equal time
   41  sharing is not in the best interests of the minor child. Except
   42  when a time-sharing schedule is agreed to by the parties and
   43  approved by the court, the court shall evaluate all of the
   44  factors set forth in subsection (3) and make specific written
   45  findings of fact schedule when creating or modifying a time
   46  sharing schedule the parenting plan of the child.
   47         2. The court shall order that the parental responsibility
   48  for a minor child be shared by both parents unless the court
   49  finds that shared parental responsibility would be detrimental
   50  to the child. The following evidence creates a rebuttable
   51  presumption of detriment to the child:
   52         a. A parent has been convicted of a misdemeanor of the
   53  first degree or higher involving domestic violence, as defined
   54  in s. 741.28 and chapter 775;
   55         b. A parent meets the criteria of s. 39.806(1)(d); or
   56         c. A parent has been convicted of or had adjudication
   57  withheld for an offense enumerated in s. 943.0435(1)(h)1.a., and
   58  at the time of the offense:
   59         (I) The parent was 18 years of age or older.
   60         (II) The victim was under 18 years of age or the parent
   61  believed the victim to be under 18 years of age.
   62  
   63  If the presumption is not rebutted after the convicted parent is
   64  advised by the court that the presumption exists, shared
   65  parental responsibility, including time-sharing with the child,
   66  and decisions made regarding the child, may not be granted to
   67  the convicted parent. However, the convicted parent is not
   68  relieved of any obligation to provide financial support. If the
   69  court determines that shared parental responsibility would be
   70  detrimental to the child, it may order sole parental
   71  responsibility and make such arrangements for time-sharing as
   72  specified in the parenting plan as will best protect the child
   73  or abused spouse from further harm. Regardless of whether or not
   74  there is a conviction of any offense of domestic violence or
   75  child abuse or the existence of an injunction for protection
   76  against domestic violence, the court shall consider evidence of
   77  domestic violence or child abuse as evidence of detriment to the
   78  child.
   79         3. In ordering shared parental responsibility, the court
   80  may consider the expressed desires of the parents and may grant
   81  to one party the ultimate responsibility over specific aspects
   82  of the child’s welfare or may divide those responsibilities
   83  between the parties based on the best interests of the child.
   84  Areas of responsibility may include education, health care, and
   85  any other responsibilities that the court finds unique to a
   86  particular family.
   87         4. The court must shall order sole parental responsibility
   88  for a minor child to one parent, with or without time-sharing
   89  with the other parent if it is in the best interests of the
   90  minor child.
   91         5. There is a rebuttable presumption against granting time
   92  sharing with a minor child if a parent has been convicted of or
   93  had adjudication withheld for an offense enumerated in s.
   94  943.0435(1)(h)1.a., and at the time of the offense:
   95         a. The parent was 18 years of age or older.
   96         b. The victim was under 18 years of age or the parent
   97  believed the victim to be under 18 years of age.
   98  
   99  A parent may rebut the presumption upon a specific finding in
  100  writing by the court that the parent poses no significant risk
  101  of harm to the child and that time-sharing is in the best
  102  interests of the minor child. If the presumption is rebutted,
  103  the court must shall consider all time-sharing factors in
  104  subsection (3) when developing a time-sharing schedule.
  105         6. Access to records and information pertaining to a minor
  106  child, including, but not limited to, medical, dental, and
  107  school records, may not be denied to either parent. Full rights
  108  under this subparagraph apply to either parent unless a court
  109  order specifically revokes these rights, including any
  110  restrictions on these rights as provided in a domestic violence
  111  injunction. A parent having rights under this subparagraph has
  112  the same rights upon request as to form, substance, and manner
  113  of access as are available to the other parent of a child,
  114  including, without limitation, the right to in-person
  115  communication with medical, dental, and education providers.
  116         (3) For purposes of establishing or modifying parental
  117  responsibility and creating, developing, approving, or modifying
  118  a parenting plan, including a time-sharing schedule, which
  119  governs each parent’s relationship with his or her minor child
  120  and the relationship between each parent with regard to his or
  121  her minor child, the best interests interest of the child must
  122  shall be the primary consideration. A determination of parental
  123  responsibility, a parenting plan, or a time-sharing schedule may
  124  not be modified without a showing of a substantial and,
  125  material, and unanticipated change in circumstances and a
  126  determination that the modification is in the best interests of
  127  the child. If the parents of a child are residing greater than
  128  50 miles apart at the time of the entry of the last order
  129  establishing time-sharing and a parent moves within 50 miles of
  130  the other parent, that move may be considered a substantial and
  131  material change in circumstances for the purpose of a
  132  modification to the time-sharing schedule, so long as there is a
  133  determination that the modification is in the best interests of
  134  the child. Determination of the best interests of the child
  135  shall be made by evaluating all of the factors affecting the
  136  welfare and interests of the particular minor child and the
  137  circumstances of that family, including, but not limited to:
  138         (a) The demonstrated capacity and disposition of each
  139  parent to facilitate and encourage a close and continuing
  140  parent-child relationship, to honor the time-sharing schedule,
  141  and to be reasonable when changes are required.
  142         (b) The anticipated division of parental responsibilities
  143  after the litigation, including the extent to which parental
  144  responsibilities will be delegated to third parties.
  145         (c) The demonstrated capacity and disposition of each
  146  parent to determine, consider, and act upon the needs of the
  147  child as opposed to the needs or desires of the parent.
  148         (d) The length of time the child has lived in a stable,
  149  satisfactory environment and the desirability of maintaining
  150  continuity.
  151         (e) The geographic viability of the parenting plan, with
  152  special attention paid to the needs of school-age children and
  153  the amount of time to be spent traveling to effectuate the
  154  parenting plan. This factor does not create a presumption for or
  155  against relocation of either parent with a child.
  156         (f) The moral fitness of the parents.
  157         (g) The mental and physical health of the parents.
  158         (h) The home, school, and community record of the child.
  159         (i) The reasonable preference of the child, if the court
  160  deems the child to be of sufficient intelligence, understanding,
  161  and experience to express a preference.
  162         (j) The demonstrated knowledge, capacity, and disposition
  163  of each parent to be informed of the circumstances of the minor
  164  child, including, but not limited to, the child’s friends,
  165  teachers, medical care providers, daily activities, and favorite
  166  things.
  167         (k) The demonstrated capacity and disposition of each
  168  parent to provide a consistent routine for the child, such as
  169  discipline, and daily schedules for homework, meals, and
  170  bedtime.
  171         (l) The demonstrated capacity of each parent to communicate
  172  with and keep the other parent informed of issues and activities
  173  regarding the minor child, and the willingness of each parent to
  174  adopt a unified front on all major issues when dealing with the
  175  child.
  176         (m) Evidence of domestic violence, sexual violence, child
  177  abuse, child abandonment, or child neglect, regardless of
  178  whether a prior or pending action relating to those issues has
  179  been brought. If the court accepts evidence of prior or pending
  180  actions regarding domestic violence, sexual violence, child
  181  abuse, child abandonment, or child neglect, the court must
  182  specifically acknowledge in writing that such evidence was
  183  considered when evaluating the best interests of the child.
  184         (n) Evidence that either parent has knowingly provided
  185  false information to the court regarding any prior or pending
  186  action regarding domestic violence, sexual violence, child
  187  abuse, child abandonment, or child neglect.
  188         (o) The particular parenting tasks customarily performed by
  189  each parent and the division of parental responsibilities before
  190  the institution of litigation and during the pending litigation,
  191  including the extent to which parenting responsibilities were
  192  undertaken by third parties.
  193         (p) The demonstrated capacity and disposition of each
  194  parent to participate and be involved in the child’s school and
  195  extracurricular activities.
  196         (q) The demonstrated capacity and disposition of each
  197  parent to maintain an environment for the child which is free
  198  from substance abuse.
  199         (r) The capacity and disposition of each parent to protect
  200  the child from the ongoing litigation as demonstrated by not
  201  discussing the litigation with the child, not sharing documents
  202  or electronic media related to the litigation with the child,
  203  and refraining from disparaging comments about the other parent
  204  to the child.
  205         (s) The developmental stages and needs of the child and the
  206  demonstrated capacity and disposition of each parent to meet the
  207  child’s developmental needs.
  208         (t) Any other factor that is relevant to the determination
  209  of a specific parenting plan, including the time-sharing
  210  schedule.
  211         Section 2. This act shall take effect July 1, 2023.