HB229 Alabama 2025 Session

Summary

Primary Sponsor

Kenneth PaschalRepresentative

Republican

Session

2025 Regular Session

Title

Child custody, rebuttable presumption of joint custody, provided; definition of joint physical custody, further provided for; joint custody model parenting plan, required in certain divorce cases; motion for temporary relief as alternative to joint custody plan, provided in certain circumstances; penalties for certain unsupported motions, provided

Summary

HB229 creates a rebuttable presumption that joint custody is in the child’s best interest, defines frequent and substantial contact as equal or near-equal time with both parents, and requires parenting plans in all custody cases along with streamlined temporary-relief and enforcement provisions.

What This Bill Does

It changes custody definitions to align with case law, establishes a joint-custody presumption with factors courts must consider, and defines frequent and substantial contact as equal time. It requires every custody case to have a parenting plan, and in contested divorces, requires following a joint custody model; a parent can file a temporary-relief motion if joint custody isn’t in the child’s best interest. It adds time-sharing remedies (makeup time, cost and attorney-fee reimbursement), empowers courts to expedite relief, and sets penalties for bad-faith or unsupported filings, while also outlining modification standards and ensuring equal enforcement of custody and support orders.

Who It Affects

• Parents/divorcing or separated couples: face a rebuttable presumption of joint custody, must submit parenting plans, may file for temporary relief if joint custody isn’t best, and could face penalties or fees for noncompliance or bad-faith actions.
• Children: potentially more shared time with both parents and a formal, consistently applied plan intended to support ongoing contact with both parents, while protection remains for abuse provisions.
• Courts and legal practitioners: must apply joint-custody presumptions, document reasons for deviations, expedite temporary-relief motions, enforce time-sharing and parenting plans, and consider a broad set of factors when determining custody.
• Any parent who does not adhere to time-sharing: could face makeup time, cost reimbursements, attorney-fee obligations, and other sanctions.

Key Provisions

• Rebuttable presumption that joint custody is in the best interest of the child; deviation requires written findings of fact and court reasoning.
• Frequent and substantial contact defined as equal or approximately equal time with both parents (joint physical custody concept).
• Parenting plan required in all custody cases; in contested divorces, follow a joint custody model; temporary relief allowed if a parent believes joint custody is not in the child’s best interest.
• Courts must expedite motions for temporary relief and may impose penalties (e.g., attorney fees) for bad-faith or unsupported filings.
• Court may establish a parenting plan if the parties cannot agree; time-sharing remedies include makeup time and cost/attorney-fee reimbursements for noncompliance.
• Remedies for noncompliance with time-sharing schedule, including makeup time, payment of costs, attendance at court-approved parenting courses, and other sanctions as needed.
• Explicit modification requirements for physical custody; criteria to modify include material change in circumstances and best interests, with consideration of disruptive effects.
• The act does not limit domestic or family abuse laws; existing protection provisions remain in effect.
• Time-sharing enforcement and equal enforcement of custody and child-support orders; penalties for noncompliance are allowed.
• Effective date set to January 1, 2026; related sections amend or add §30-3-1, §30-3-150 to §30-3-157 and add §30-3-158.

AI-generated summary using openai/gpt-5-nano on Feb 22, 2026. May contain errors — refer to the official bill text for accuracy.

Subjects

Family Law