Senate committee advances revised parenting-plan bill after contested amendments

Engrossed substitute House Bill 16-20, concerning limitations and parenting plans, received a due-pass recommendation from the Washington State Senate Law & Justice Committee on March 20 and was sent to the Rules Committee for further consideration.

The bill, as amended by a striking amendment adopted in committee, revises the statutory purpose statement, includes abusive-use-of-conflict provisions, and changes court discretion, criteria and procedural requirements for imposing limitations on parenting and residential provisions. Committee discussion focused on balancing protections for survivors of gender-based violence with concerns that new provisions could be weaponized in family-court litigation.

Senator Fortunato, who offered several amendments including Foxtrot 1 and Foxtrot 2, said the amendments were intended to “address the abusive use of conflict issue and make it a little more defined” and to reduce the risk that the provision could be used improperly in court. The committee considered but ultimately rejected Foxtrot 1 (which would have added repeated violations of a parenting plan as a factor and added an opportunity to purge contempt) and Foxtrot 2 (which would have created a work group to study restrictions and parenting plans). Both failed on the floor of the committee.

Committee members voiced differing views on whether the striker returned the bill to language that had broader expert support. Senator Torres, urging support for the adopted striker, said it aligned the bill to prior work and would require judges to make written findings of fact, which she described as important for access to justice and for appellate review. Senator Wagner and others raised concerns about particular language and standards but ultimately supported the version sent forward.

Opponents and some committee members warned that some proposed language—particularly anti-disparagement provisions that would limit what a parent may say to a child—could be difficult to enforce and might be weaponized against survivors. Senator Torres described real-world failures in protecting victims in prior cases and said the bill still needed more work but moved forward to keep momentum for reforms she said would improve judicial clarity and survivor access.

The committee adopted the striking amendment (Foxtrot) and then voted to recommend the engrossed substitute House Bill 16-20, as amended, for further consideration; the recommendation was recorded as a due-pass to Rules.

The bill has been the subject of multi-year work and multiple stakeholder negotiations; committee members said further refinement and implementation planning (including judicial training) will likely continue as the bill moves through the process.

House Bill 16-20 will next be scheduled by the Rules Committee for potential floor action.