Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Child Custody Evaluator Qualifications topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bill would require training and redaction for child custody evaluators after parent testimony
Summary
Senate Committee on Jurisprudence members heard explanation and public testimony on House Bill 2340, which would require people who conduct child custody evaluations to complete recent training on children with intellectual or developmental disabilities and to redact sensitive personal information before records are shared.
Senate Committee on Jurisprudence members heard explanation and public testimony on House Bill 2340, which would require people who conduct child custody evaluations to complete recent training on children with intellectual or developmental disabilities and to redact sensitive personal information before records are shared.
The bill, presented to the committee by Senator Judith Zaffirini, would require evaluators to complete, within the prior two years, at least three hours of training related to caring for children with intellectual or developmental disabilities. It would also mandate redaction of sensitive data and would bar courts from admitting evaluations as evidence unless the evaluator met the training requirement.
The measure matters, supporters said, because custody evaluators may recommend placements to a judge and their reports are often relied on in litigation.
Claudia Laird, who testified in favor of the bill, described her family’s experience with a domestic relations office evaluation. "They then took this information and gave it to the opposing party, which mean they means they gave my minor daughter's birth date and social security number and my social security number to a woman who had plead guilty to theft," Laird said.
Laird also said the evaluator who visited her home displayed little familiarity with educating children with intellectual disabilities. She urged the committee to require additional training for evaluators and to require redaction before files are released.
Senator Zaffirini explained the sponsor’s intent: to limit what clerks must transmit and to allow parties to request additional documents if necessary while protecting sensitive personal information.
No witnesses registered opposition; the committee opened and then closed public testimony during the hearing. The bill was left pending.
The committee did not take a vote during the hearing. Further action, including any amendments or scheduling for markup, was not decided at the time the bill was left pending.
