Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Family Visitation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
House Bill 481 Draws Pushback From Domestic-Violence Advocates and Bar Groups
Summary
HB 481 would require courts to order makeup visitation time when one parent unjustifiably denies court-ordered visitation. Sponsors said the change protects children; opponents, including MSBA and domestic-violence advocates, said the proposal is too prescriptive and could be abused in safety-sensitive cases.
Delegate Steve Johnson presented House Bill 481, which would require courts to reschedule and restore time when one parent unjustifiably denies court-ordered visitation. Supporters framed the proposal as child-centered, arguing that when visitation is withheld the child loses a parental relationship and the court should restore comparable time.
Brian Fitzgerald and other parents and advocates described scenarios where withheld time causes lasting harm, and said mandatory makeup remedies would deter bad-faith denials. The Judiciary panel heard opposition from the Maryland State Bar Association's family-law section and from domestic-violence organizations. They said the bill imposes a one-size-fits-all remedy that removes judicial discretion and could be weaponized in high-conflict cases, including where a parent withheld visitation for a purported safety concern.
MSBA and MVADV urged more nuanced remedies, including encouraging settlement and individualized assessment; they recommended against mandatory doubling of time and the provision that would let the wronged parent choose the makeup dates.
Ending: Committee did not vote; sponsors and opponents indicated willingness to negotiate language to protect children while preserving judicial discretion in safety-sensitive cases.
