[Congressional Record Volume 164, Number 158 (Tuesday, September 25, 2018)]
[House]
[Pages H8844-H8847]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
EXPRESSING THE SENSE OF CONGRESS THAT CHILD SAFETY IS THE FIRST
PRIORITY OF CUSTODY AND VISITATION ADJUDICATIONS
Mr. RUTHERFORD. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to
the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 72) expressing the sense of
Congress that child safety is the first priority of custody and
visitation adjudications, and that State courts should improve
adjudications of custody where family violence is alleged, as amended.
The Clerk read the title of the concurrent resolution.
The text of the concurrent resolution is as follows:
H. Con. Res. 72
Whereas approximately 15 million children are exposed each
year to domestic violence and/or child abuse, which are often
linked;
Whereas child sexual abuse is significantly under-
documented, and under-addressed in the legal system;
Whereas child abuse is a major public health issue in the
United States, with total lifetime estimated financial costs
associated with just one year of confirmed cases of child
maltreatment (including physical abuse, sexual abuse,
psychological abuse and neglect) amounting to approximately
$124 billion;
Whereas according to the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention, federally launched, funded and tracked
longitudinal research into ``adverse childhood experiences''
(the ACEs study) has shown that ``children who experience
abuse and neglect are also at increased risk for adverse
health effects and certain chronic diseases as adults,
including heart disease, cancer, chronic lung disease, liver
disease, obesity, high blood pressure, high cholesterol, and
high levels of C-reactive protein'';
Whereas research confirms that allegations of domestic
violence, child abuse, and child sexual abuse are often
discounted when raised in child custody litigation;
Whereas research shows that abusive parents are often
granted custody or unprotected parenting time by courts,
placing children at ongoing risk;
Whereas research confirms that a child's risk of abuse
increases after a perpetrator of domestic violence separates
from a domestic partner, even when the perpetrator has not
previously abused the child;
Whereas researchers have documented a minimum of 653
children murdered in the United States since 2008 by a parent
involved in a divorce, separation, custody, visitation, or
child support proceeding, often after access was provided by
family courts over the objections of a protective parent;
Whereas scientifically unsound theories are frequently
applied to reject parents' and children's reports of abuse;
Whereas in cases involving allegations of family violence
courts should rely on the assistance of third-party
professionals only when they possess the proper experience or
expertise for assessing family violence and trauma, and apply
scientifically sound and evidence-based theories;
Whereas most States lack standards defining required
expertise and experience for court-affiliated or appointed
fee-paid professionals in custody litigation or the required
contents of custody-related expert reports; and
Whereas custody litigation involving abuse allegations is
sometimes prohibitively expensive, resulting in parental
bankruptcy, as a result of court-mandated payments to
appointed fee-paid professionals, in addition to attorneys'
fees: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate
concurring), That it is the sense of Congress that--
(1) child safety is the first priority of custody and
parenting adjudications, and courts should resolve safety
risks and claims of family violence first, as a fundamental
consideration, before assessing other best interest factors;
(2) all evidence admitted in custody and parenting
adjudications should be subject to evidentiary admissibility
standards;
(3) evidence from court-affiliated or appointed fee-paid
professionals regarding adult or child abuse allegations in
custody cases should be admitted only when the professional
possesses documented expertise and experience in the relevant
types of abuse, trauma, and the behaviors of victims and
perpetrators;
(4) States should define required standards of expertise
and experience for appointed fee-paid professionals who
provide evidence to the court on abuse, trauma and behaviors
of victims and perpetrators, should specify requirements for
the contents of such professional reports, and should require
courts to find that any appointed professionals meet those
standards;
(5) States should consider models under which court-
appointed professionals are paid directly by the courts, with
potential reimbursement by the parties after due
consideration of the parties' financial circumstances; and
[[Page H8845]]
(6) Congress should schedule hearings on family courts'
practices with regard to the objective, fair, and unbiased
adjudication of children's safety and civil rights.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Budd). Pursuant to the rule, the
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Rutherford) and the gentlewoman from Texas
(Ms. Jackson Lee) each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida.
General Leave
Mr. RUTHERFORD. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their
remarks and include extraneous material on H. Con. Res. 72, currently
under consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Florida?
There was no objection.
Mr. RUTHERFORD. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased we are voting today on this resolution,
which expresses the sense of Congress that child safety should be the
top priority of custody and visitation adjudications, and that State
courts should improve adjudications of custody where family violence is
alleged.
Custody adjudications are especially difficult cases, fraught with
emotion and complex relationships. States must ensure that the judges
presiding over these cases are trained to understand these dynamics and
apply appropriate evidentiary standards to parties' evidence.
Most importantly, States should ensure that in these disputes,
children's safety comes first.
We have seen tragedies happen throughout the United States where the
courts failed the children involved in custody disputes. Over the past
decade, the Center for Judicial Excellence has documented 653 child
homicides across the United States by a parent involved in a conflict
related to divorce, separation, custody, visitation, or child support.
Last year, Ana Estevez's 5-year-old son, Piqui, was murdered by her
ex-husband. Despite her efforts to obtain sole custody of Piqui due to
her ex-husband's history of abuse, her plea was rejected.
Her estranged husband picked up Piqui, as part of their joint custody
arrangement, and took him to Disneyland. That was the last time Ms.
Estevez saw her son.
His body was found 2 months later, and her estranged husband
eventually confessed to the murder, a tragedy that should never have
happened.
Today, we take a step in expressing to States that they must pay
special attention to these cases. We hope States will heed this
resolution and resolve to evaluate their family court systems and
implement measures to put child safety first.
I thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sessions) for bringing this
resolution before us. I urge my colleagues to support this resolution,
and I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the House concurrent resolution. I
thank my colleague on the Judiciary Committee for his leadership.
I want to indicate that, first and foremost, this bipartisan
resolution expresses the sense of Congress that child safety should be
the top priority of any custody and parenting court adjudications, and
that courts should resolve safety risks and claims of domestic violence
first, before taking any other interest into consideration.
The resolution also underscores Congress' strong support for the use
of scientific-based evidence in family court, including reliance on
expert professionals with expertise in relevant types of abuse, trauma,
and behaviors of victims and perpetrators by, among other things,
establishing specific standards for the preparation of professional
reports.
This resolution also encourages States to consider models through
which such professional experts can be appointed and paid directly by
the courts as needed, and expresses the sense of Congress that we hold
hearings examining family court practices with regard to the fair
adjudication of children's safety and civil rights.
I think many of us as Members of Congress who deal in family issues,
and as the founder and co-chair of the Congressional Children's Caucus,
and being a student of the Family Protective Services--Child Protective
Services, I have seen more than one case where a child is returned to a
family and gets caught up in the unfortunate practices of that family
situation, that home situation. Yes, they wind up losing their life,
children as young as 1 and 2 and 3 years old, helpless, without being
able to help themselves.
H. Con. Res. 72 acknowledges that the Inter-American Commission on
Human Rights has found that the United States has failed in its legal
obligation to protect women and children from domestic violence.
It certainly seems appropriate, as we debate this, that I ask my
colleagues on the other side of the aisle, and it is not too late, to
join me in putting the Violence Against Women Act on the floor of the
House with over 160 cosponsors that specifically address the question
of domestic violence, domestic abuse. So many of our collaborating
groups from all over the country, both conservative and otherwise, are
arguing and advocating for the passage of the Violence Against Women
Act before its expiration on September 30, 2018. It would be a
complement to this sense of Congress.
In recognition of the fact that the problem of domestic violence is
among the most serious social problems in this country, the resolution
makes a number of important findings in this regard. Child abuse, in
and of itself, is a major public health issue. It costs billions of
dollars annually and, unfortunately, the loss of children's lives.
But the cost of child abuse cannot be measured in simple monetary
terms because, as a study by the Centers for Disease Control tells us,
children who experience adverse childhood experiences are at a greater
risk to develop certain chronic diseases like heart disease and cancer.
The consequences for children who experience abuse and neglect are
long-lasting, long-reaching, and cannot be measured easily.
As this resolution finds, child sexual abuse, too, as horrific as it
is, is a matter that goes routinely underdocumented and underaddressed.
Time and again, research confirms that allegations of domestic
violence, child abuse, and child sexual abuse are often discounted when
it comes to child custody litigation.
This is with family members or guardians of a particular child.
Tragically, abusive parents are often granted custody or unprotected
parenting time, which places children at constant risk. The risk of
abuse to the child increases when a perpetrator of domestic violence
separates from a domestic partner.
Most disturbing is the resolution's finding that documents a minimum
of 568 murders of children in the United States in a 10-year period by
a parent involved in divorce, separation, custody, visitation, or child
support proceedings. In many of these instances, the family courts
granted access to the child by the abusive parent over the objection of
the protective parent.
Finally, this resolution recognizes the need for courts to appoint
well-qualified professionals, at court expense, who will apply
scientifically sound and evidence-based theories to assist in the
adjudication of custody litigation. Because such assistance is not
routinely provided, parents seeking to vindicate their rights in
custody disputes often incur overwhelming debt and may even need to
file for bankruptcy relief as a result. In the United States, this
should be unacceptable.
For these reasons, I encourage my colleagues to join me in supporting
H. Con. Res. 72.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of House Concurrent Resolution 72.
First and foremost, this bipartisan resolution expresses the sense of
Congress that child safety should be the top priority of any custody
and parenting court adjudications and that courts should resolve safety
risks and claims of domestic violence first, before taking other
interests into consideration.
The resolution also underscores Congress's strong support for the use
of scientific-based evidence in family court, including reliance on
expert professionals with expertise in relevant types of abuse, trauma,
and behaviors of victims and perpetrators by, among other things,
establishing specific standards for the preparation of professional
reports.
[[Page H8846]]
This resolution also encourages States to consider models through
which such professional experts can be appointed and paid directly by
the courts, as needed.
And, it expresses the sense of Congress that we hold hearings
examining family court practices with regards to the fair adjudication
of children's safety and civil rights.
House Concurrent Resolution 72 acknowledges that the Inter-American
Commission on Human Rights has found that the United States has failed
in its legal obligation to protect women and children from domestic
violence.
In recognition of the fact that the problem of domestic violence is
among the most serious social problems in this country, the resolution
makes a number of important findings in this regard. Child abuse, in-
and-of-itself, is a major public health issue--and it costs billions of
dollars annually. But the ``cost'' of child abuse cannot be measured in
simple monetary terms because, as a study by the Centers for Disease
Control tells us, children who experience ``adverse childhood
experiences'' are at greater risk to develop certain chronic diseases,
like heart disease and cancer. The consequences for children who
experience abuse and neglect are long-lasting and long-reaching and
cannot be measured easily.
As this resolution finds, child sexual abuse, too, as horrific as it
is, is a matter that goes routinely under-documented and under-
addressed. But, time and again, research confirms that allegations of
domestic violence, child abuse, and child sexual abuse are often
discounted when it comes to child custody litigation. Tragically,
abusive parents are often granted custody or unprotected parenting
time, which places children at constant risk, and the risk of abuse to
the child increases when a perpetrator of domestic violence separates
from a domestic partner.
Most disturbing is the resolution's finding that documents a minimum
of 568 murders of children in the United States in a 10-year period by
a parent involved in divorce, separation, custody, visitation, or child
support proceedings. In many of these instances, the family courts
granted access to the child by the abusive parent, over the objection
of the protective parent.
Finally, this resolution recognizes the need for courts to appoint
well-qualified professionals, at court expense, who will apply
scientifically sound and evidence-based theories, to assist in the
adjudication of custody litigation. Because such assistance is not
routinely provided, parents seeking to vindicate their rights in
custody disputes often incur overwhelming debt and may even need to
file for bankruptcy relief as a result. In the United States, this
should be unacceptable.
For these reasons, I encourage my colleagues to join me in supporting
House Concurrent Resolution 72.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. RUTHERFORD. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to
the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sessions).
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the distinguished
gentleman, who spent his career not only as a sheriff, but a duly-
elected constitutional Member in Florida, but also to the distinguished
gentlewoman from Houston, Texas, who has served as an attorney serving
the people of Houston, Texas.
Mr. Speaker, I rise tonight to make sure that as we respectfully
address this issue, H. Con. Res. 72, which urges States to look at
improved family court proceedings of child custody cases, ensuring that
child safety is a top priority, it makes clear that Congress will use
its oversight authority to engage in this issue also.
We do not come at this issue lightly, Mr. Speaker. As a matter of
fact, the Domestic Violence Legal Empowerment and Appeals Project has
provided a great deal of information, not only to Members of Congress,
but by visiting the Members, making sure that they understand that
their work with the Center for Judicial Excellence and the Protective
Parents Association of California have made sure that they saw these
issues clearly and talked to Members of Congress about our ideas, not
only as we fund Federal programs, but as we understand in our
discussions with States that we prioritize and help them look at what
is, seemingly, a national crisis.
This national crisis is about how our children are dealt with in the
court system and looked at. Specifically, this is a concurrent
resolution that urges States to develop family court procedures to
resolve claims of abuse and family violence before making any other
determination in the case, allowing courts to focus on these
allegations affecting child safety independently.
{time} 2000
What did I just say? Well, what I just said is many times in court
proceedings where there is a family violence circumstance, where there
is stress in a family, there are examples that either side might talk
about what is in the best interest of the child.
And courts across this country, whether at their local court, whether
a state court, we are asking them to understand that this national
crisis deals with children that are being placed in a circumstance that
might not be in their best interest, and it calls on States to prohibit
the use of discredited or unscientific theories in their family courts.
In other words, there are many times provisions in a court or a bias of
a court to take one side or the other.
Finally, it highlights the problems that some litigants--these are
people back in their own home States--face regarding mandatory fees,
and Congress is asking the States to look at these.
Many times, as the distinguished gentlewoman from Houston talked
about, there are fee structures which keep families from fully
participating to protect their children because of the cost. This is an
important issue.
Tragically, millions of children are impacted in the United States of
America. They call it domestic violence or child abuse, but the bottom
line is that the resulting harm is lasting to our children. Physical,
sexual, or emotional abuse, this trauma stays with our children for
some period of time and many times it lasts for a lifetime.
It also imposes billions of dollars on society where these children
need to be handled, dealt with, and worked through a system for them to
understand what happened in their childhood would create some
difficulties later in their life.
Simply put, we believe that family courts need better expertise.
Better expertise not only in terms of the legal counsel that is
involved, but perhaps outside professionals who would address these
issues.
In my home State of Texas, we have had to reevaluate the
circumstances, not just of divorce, but of domestic violence where a
child is involved, trying to focus more directly on the needs of the
child and then having that family, two sides for sure, who would come
together to see what is in the best interest of that child.
Family courts need to address abuse, and once again, many times it is
not uncommon for them to have to address these through the frailties of
a system, frailties of people who give testimony, and perhaps theories
that are not always in the best interest of the child that might be
proposed in court.
So one story in particular has it of a young girl named Kyra who
tragically lost her life at the age of 2 in 2016 while her family was
going through the court system. The focus became the battle, not the
child, and the child fell in between the processes and, unfortunately,
the tragedy occurred because of this huge disagreement between the
family to where her father brutally murdered her before setting the
house on fire and killing himself.
The tragedy involved, rather than highlighting the differences
between these two, of the safety of the child. And the safety of the
child and of the mother is vitally important.
At least 653 child murders by a parent involved in a divorce,
separation, custody, or visitation, child support have been documented
in the United States over the last 10 years. That is a tragedy. That is
a nightmare that is happening directly before us.
This is why we believe that listening to outside groups, such as the
Domestic Violence Legal Empowerment and Appeals Project and the
Judicial Excellence Coalition have come to Congress to say, we would
like for you to see what is happening back in your States, back in your
communities, back where you are from, Members of Congress, and see if
you can shine a spotlight on showing how important children and women
are, not just in our society, but in the court system.
So what I would say is I would like to thank my colleagues, the
gentleman who started this, the gentleman from Pennsylvania,
Congressman Pat Meehan, for his dedication to this issue, as well as my
dear friend from New York, Congresswoman Carolyn B. Maloney,
[[Page H8847]]
for her leadership as she has joined me on so many issues where we deal
with women's health and women's safety, children's health, children's
safety, including disabled children and people who cannot protect
themselves.
Mr. Speaker, whether you live in Florida, Texas, Pennsylvania, or
wherever you might be in this country, it is important for us to
understand that the focus on children's safety in court matters is
essential to the Nation's health and support for the future.
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the distinguished gentleman and the
chairman of the committee, Chairman Goodlatte, for allowing this to
come forth at this time.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished gentleman from Florida for
yielding me this time.
Mr. RUTHERFORD. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time to
close.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I might
consume.
Mr. Speaker, first of all, let me certainly thank Mr. Sessions, my
colleague out of Texas, for his very important words and moving
commentary. I thank Congressman Rutherford for his service and
commitment, and the other cosponsors of this legislation, because it
really has more impact.
Let me conclude my remarks by acknowledging a tragedy in my district.
As a hardworking mother was separating from her spouse, it had not yet
gotten to the court, but it is evidence of what can happen. The remarks
of the dad were, ``Bring them over for me to see them one more time.''
And even though the relationship between mom and dad was hostile, mom
wanted to be cooperative, and brought them over and left them for a
moment as she went to her small business.
The next call she got was the shrill of police and neighbors
screaming, and his call to her, the parent's call, the father's call,
and he said, ``Now come over and see your two dead children, because I
have killed them.''
So this is constant throughout the Nation, and we need intervention
and we need recognition of the tragedies that can happen.
So as I previously stated, I strongly support passage of H. Con. Res
72. It is a sober acknowledgement of how family courts in the United
States are failing to protect the very children they are sworn to
protect in cases involving domestic violence, and obviously these cases
have histories of domestic violence. But also as a legislative body, we
have far more effective ways to deal with these problems. They can
complement H. Con. Res. 72.
So I would like to, again, reinforce the bill that was introduced
last July--this July, that I introduced, over 150 cosponsors, I
believe. I introduced a robust bill to reauthorize the Violence Against
Women Act.
This VAWA reauthorization seeks to address the problem of domestic
violence from a holistic perspective by attacking the problem from many
different angles with resources, recognizing all the different
components that are now before us. We need to reauthorize VAWA, not in
any watered down fashion, and we need to do it in complement to H. Con.
Res. 72. And if we hope to make any dent in this very serious problem
and to protect women and children and men who are abused and victimized
day in and day out, this is how we need to do it, pass bills like the
concurrent resolution and also VAWA.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this resolution and join
me in this bipartisan effort as well to pass VAWA.
As I previously stated, I strongly support passage of House
Concurrent Resolution 72. It is a sober acknowledgement of how family
courts in the United States are failing to protect the very children
they are sworn to protect, in cases involving domestic violence.
But, as a legislative body, we have far more effective ways to deal
with these problems than merely passing concurrent resolutions. Last
July, I introduced a robust bill to reauthorize the Violence Against
Women Act. This VAWA reauthorization seeks to address the problem of
domestic violence from a holistic perspective, by attacking the problem
from many different angles. We need to reauthorize VAWA--not in any
watered-down fashion--if we hope to make any dent into this very
serious problem and to protect women, children and men who are abused
and victimized day in and day out.
I urge my colleagues to support House Concurrent Resolution 72.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. RUTHERFORD. Mr. Speaker, I first want to thank the gentlewoman
for her comments and for her hard work on this resolution. I also want
to thank Chairman Sessions for bringing this forward today.
I want to encourage all of my colleagues here to vote in the
affirmative for H. Con. Res. 72.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Rutherford) that the House suspend the
rules and agree to the concurrent resolution, H. Con. Res. 72, as
amended.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the
rules were suspended and the concurrent resolution, as amended, was
agreed to.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________