Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Family Court Parenting Time topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
House committee gives HB 2296 due pass after emotional testimony on prioritizing child’s best interest
Summary
The Arizona House Government Committee voted to give House Bill 2296 a due pass recommendation after sponsors and supporters argued the measure would refocus family-court decisions on the child’s best interest. Public commenters described long, traumatic custody fights that they say the bill would help prevent.
House Government Committee Chairman Walter Blackmon said the committee returned House Bill 2296 with a due pass recommendation after sponsors and several public witnesses urged the committee to prioritize children’s needs in family-court custody decisions.
Supporters told the committee the current statute (ARS 25‑403 was discussed repeatedly) and practice effectively prioritize parental rights or presumed shared parenting and, they argued, can harm children by disrupting primary caregiver bonds. Representative Keshel, a sponsor of the family‑court package of bills, told the committee lawmakers are responding to a rising number of family‑court cases that, she said, “often prioritize parental rights and not necessarily the children’s best interest.”
The bill’s proponents framed HB 2296 as a technical but important change that would remove presumptions that shared parenting time is automatically in a child’s best interest and instead allow courts to focus on attachment and primary caregiving. Silver Newton of Arizona Advocacy Summit told the committee ARS 25‑403 currently “penalizes the parent who is viewed by the child as the primary caregiver” and urged a yes vote. A public commenter, who identified herself as Sofia and said she has been through repeated custody proceedings with her sister, described the emotional and educational harm she said her family experienced after a court‑ordered custody change. “HB 2296 makes sure that a child’s best interests are prioritized,” Sofia said.
Committee members asked sponsors about next steps. Several members said they supported moving the bill forward but expect amendments and further work with stakeholders, including domestic‑violence advocates and the courts, to address safety and implementation questions. Representative Keshel and other sponsors said they are preparing amendments and stakeholder meetings.
On the roll call for the committee recommendation, members recorded six ayes, zero nays and one present. Chairman Blackmon said the committee would continue to work on amendments and stakeholder meetings as the bill moves through the process.
Votes at a glance: HB 2296 — Motion: return with a due pass recommendation; outcome: due pass recommendation; committee tally: 6 ayes, 0 nays, 1 present.
Local context: supporters argued the change reflects research about adverse childhood experiences and attachment to a primary caregiver. Opponents (not present in force at this hearing) — and some members — asked for further consultations with domestic‑violence stakeholders and the courts to ensure statutory language does not create unintended consequences for child safety or federal funding compatibility.
