Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Family Law topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Senate debates custody‑law changes to protect parents with disabilities in HB215

Utah State Senate · February 12, 1997
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

HB215, concerning custody disputes involving parents with disabilities, was debated at length on Feb. 12. Sponsors said the bill prevents courts from using disability alone as a material change of circumstances while preserving judicial discretion to determine a child's best interests.

House Bill 215, presented to the Senate on Feb. 12, addresses how courts treat parental disability in custody determinations. Representative Tanner (sponsor) explained that the bill is meant to prevent courts from automatically regarding a disability as a material and substantial change that would justify transferring custody; instead, it preserves the court’s ability to assess whether a disability impairs a parent's ability to provide for a child’s best interests.

Senators questioned how the measure interacts with existing family‑law practice and sought clarifications about definitions and judicial discretion. The bill’s text was described as including language that the court "may not discriminate against the parent due to a disability as defined under the section," while permitting the court to consider concrete evidence about how a disability affects caregiving capacity.

Floor speakers discussed a Utah County case that reportedly prompted the bill and argued the measure codifies protections against discrimination while leaving ultimate determinations with judges. Sponsors emphasized that the change is not intended to remove judicial discretion but to avoid automatic penalization of parents on the basis of disability alone.

Next steps: The question was called and the bill proceeded through roll‑call procedures on the floor for further action.