Parents urge task force to adopt equal shared parenting; some testify false allegations are used as leverage

Child Custody Review Task Force · December 11, 2025
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

Two public witnesses told the task force personal stories and urged statutory changes favoring equal shared parenting, arguing false accusations are used to obtain temporary exclusive custody; speakers requested training for judges and clearer restoration pathways.

Two members of the public used their allotted presentations to push the task force toward legislation establishing a stronger presumption of equal shared parenting and to highlight concerns about false allegations and post‑separation harms.

Von Anderson described a 2023 episode in which his children were taken and a restraining order obtained; he said evidence later undermined the allegations and argued that false claims can be used strategically in custody disputes. Anderson told the task force he supported a stronger path to restore parenting time once allegations are disproved and asked the committee to require higher evidentiary standards for orders that remove parent access.

"These became a little clearer after I read an attorney's article titled 'False Accusations of Domestic Violence in Family Law cases,'" Anderson said, summarizing why he believes better proof and accountability are needed.

Clyde Peterson (who identified himself as a father of three) advocated for a 50/50 parenting presumption and cited research he said links shared parenting to improved child outcomes. Peterson called for mandatory training on parental alienation for judges and guardians ad litem, a clear pathway for parents to regain time after treatment for substance abuse, and stricter review when judges stray from professional investigators' reports.

Task force members listened but did not adopt immediate policy language during the meeting. Several members noted that claims made by public commenters are assertions and that data and statutory drafting would be needed before the committee could act. No formal vote or policy change occurred during public comment.