Senate File 315 - Introduced SENATE FILE BY LUNDBY, SENG, JOHNSON, ANGELO, DANIELSON, McCOY, WOOD, and PUTNEY Passed Senate, Date Passed House, Date Vote: Ayes Nays Vote: Ayes Nays Approved A BILL FOR 1 An Act relating to joint physical care of children in dissolution 2 cases and establishing a rebuttable presumption that a request 3 for joint physical care is in the best interest of the child. 4 BE IT ENACTED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF IOWA: 5 TLSB 2608XS 82 6 pf/cf/24 PAG LIN 1 1 Section 1. Section 598.41, subsection 5, paragraph a, Code 1 2 2007, is amended to read as follows: 1 3 a. If joint legal custody is awarded to both parents, the 1 4 court may award joint physical care to both joint custodial 1 5 parents upon the request of either parent during the 1 6 proceedings on the initial dissolution petition or during the 1 7 proceedings on a modification of the original custody order. 1 8 A rebuttable presumption exists that a request for joint 1 9 physical care by either parent is in the best interest of the 1 10 child, the burden of proof to rebut the presumption rests on 1 11 the party denying that joint physical care is in the best 1 12 interest of the child, and such party shall demonstrate that 1 13 joint physical care is not in the best interest of the child 1 14 by clear and convincing evidence. Prior to ruling on the 1 15 request for the award of joint physical care, the court may 1 16 require the parents to submit, either individually or jointly, 1 17 a proposed joint physical care parenting plan. A proposed 1 18 joint physical care parenting plan shall address how the 1 19 parents will make decisions affecting the child, how the 1 20 parents will provide a home for the child, how the child's 1 21 time will be divided between the parents and how each parent 1 22 will facilitate the child's time with the other parent, 1 23 arrangements in addition to court=ordered child support for 1 24 the child's expenses, how the parents will resolve major 1 25 changes or disagreements affecting the child including changes 1 26 that arise due to the child's age and developmental needs, and 1 27 any other issues the court may require. If the court finds by 1 28 clear and convincing evidence that joint physical care is not 1 29 in the best interest of the child and denies the request for 1 30 joint physical care, the determination shall be accompanied by 1 31 specific findings of fact and conclusions of law that the 1 32 awarding of joint physical care is not in the best interest of 1 33 the child. In determining the best interest of the child 1 34 relative to the denial of a request for joint physical care, 1 35 the court shall consider that the best interest of the child 2 1 includes the opportunity for maximum continuous physical and 2 2 emotional contact possible with both parents, unless direct 2 3 physical or significant emotional harm to the child may result 2 4 from this contact. 2 5 EXPLANATION 2 6 This bill provides that in awarding joint physical care to 2 7 parents under the dissolution of marriage chapter, joint 2 8 physical care may be awarded to both parents based upon a 2 9 request by either parent either during the proceedings on the 2 10 initial dissolution petition or during the proceedings on a 2 11 modification of the original custody order. The bill creates 2 12 a rebuttable presumption that a request for joint physical 2 13 care by either parent is in the best interest of the child, 2 14 places the burden of proof to rebut the presumption on the 2 15 party denying that joint physical care is in the best interest 2 16 of the child, and requires such party to demonstrate that 2 17 joint physical care is not in the best interest of the child 2 18 by clear and convincing evidence. The bill also requires that 2 19 if the court denies joint physical care, the court must base 2 20 the findings on clear and convincing evidence. In determining 2 21 the best interest of the child relative to the denial of a 2 22 request for joint physical care, the court is required to 2 23 consider that the best interest of the child includes the 2 24 opportunity for maximum continuous physical and emotional 2 25 contact possible with both parents, unless direct physical or 2 26 significant emotional harm to the child may result from this 2 27 contact. 2 28 LSB 2608XS 82 2 29 pf:rj/cf/24.1