AN ACT relating to interpersonal violence and abuse.
Summary
HB595 revises Kentucky’s definitions and terminology in the state’s domestic violence and protective order laws to broaden and modernize how abuse is recognized. In KRS 403.720, the bill expands “domestic violence and abuse” to expressly include patterns of physical, sexual, emotional, economic, psychological, or technological abuse used to gain or maintain power and control, and it adds conduct involving harm or threats against a domestic animal when used to coerce or intimidate a family member or unmarried partner. It also updates related definitions such as “family member,” “foreign protective order,” “order of protection,” “sexual assault,” “stalking,” “strangulation,” and “substantial violation.”
Impact
The bill would amend two major statutory frameworks: Kentucky’s domestic violence statutes in KRS 403.715 to 403.785 and the interpersonal protective order chapter in KRS 456.010. Its practical effect is to broaden the conduct that can support protective relief, align statutory language with modern abuse patterns, and clarify that animal abuse can be part of coercive control in intimate or family relationships. It also updates cross-references and terminology so courts, law enforcement, and petitioners can rely on a more expansive and explicit set of definitions when seeking or enforcing protective orders.
Sentiment
The available record shows no committee transcript or recorded vote history, so there is no documented floor or committee debate to gauge direct support or opposition. Based on the bill text, the measure appears to be framed as a protective, victim-centered update to domestic violence law, with an emphasis on recognizing coercive control, technology-facilitated abuse, and threats to pets. The overall sentiment inferred from the drafting is generally favorable toward expanding protections for victims and clarifying enforcement tools.
Contention
The main points of potential contention are the bill’s expansion of abuse definitions beyond physical violence to include emotional, economic, psychological, and technological conduct, which could raise questions about evidentiary standards and scope. Another likely issue is the inclusion of domestic animal abuse as a form of coercion in intimate and family relationships, which broadens the reach of protective order law. The bill also changes the treatment of foreign protective orders and updates the definition of “order of protection” in ways that may prompt discussion about reciprocity, enforcement, and how temporary or out-of-state orders are recognized.