HB 370 is a North Carolina bill that would enact two uniform laws related to children. First, it creates the Uniform Child Abduction Prevention Act in Chapter 50A, giving courts explicit authority to identify credible risks of child abduction in custody cases and to impose preventive measures. Those measures can include travel restrictions, surrender of passports, supervised visitation, bond requirements, registration of orders in other states, and, in urgent cases, ex parte warrants for law enforcement to take physical custody of a child. The bill also defines risk factors a court may consider, including prior abduction threats, domestic violence, immigration or citizenship issues, suspicious travel planning, and ties to countries with weaker child-return enforcement or safety concerns.
Second, the bill adds Article 3 of the Uniform Unregulated Child Custody Transfer Act to Chapter 48, focused on adoption-related disclosures and guidance. It requires agencies placing certain minors for adoption to provide prospective adoptive parents with general adoption information, nonidentifying background and medical information, and guidance tailored to the child’s needs, including trauma, prior placements, cultural differences, and citizenship issues. It also directs agencies and DHHS to provide information about financial assistance and support services, and authorizes DHHS to investigate and enforce compliance against agencies that fail to meet these duties.
The bill would also revise existing adoption disclosure law in G.S. 48-3-205 by clarifying and expanding the required written background information provided before placement, including more detailed health, genetic, and abuse-history information, while preserving confidentiality protections and limiting use of the information in civil or criminal proceedings. The new child-abduction provisions would apply to petitions or motions filed on or after October 1, 2025, while the adoption-information provisions would apply to placements beginning 60 days after the section’s effective date.
Overall, the bill appears aimed at standardizing North Carolina’s custody and adoption practices with model uniform acts and strengthening protections for children in high-risk custody disputes and adoption placements. The available legislative record shows no recorded votes or committee debate excerpts, so there is no documented opposition or support in the provided materials. The bill’s last recorded action was referral to the Senate Rules and Operations Committee on April 3, 2025.
HB 370 would amend Chapters 50A and 48 of the North Carolina General Statutes by adding a new child-abduction prevention article and a new adoption-information and guidance part, while also revising existing adoption disclosure requirements in G.S. 48-3-205. It would expand district court authority in custody cases, create new petition and emergency warrant procedures, and impose new duties on agencies and DHHS in adoption placements. The bill would affect parents in custody disputes, prospective adoptive parents, adoption agencies, courts, law enforcement, and the Department of Health and Human Services.
The bill’s overall framing is protective and procedural, with the text emphasizing child safety, uniformity across states, and better-informed adoption decisions. Because no committee transcript excerpts or vote tallies were provided, there is no direct evidence of floor or committee sentiment beyond the bill’s favorable committee substitute status. The available record suggests the measure was advanced in a generally positive posture, but the absence of recorded debate means specific support or opposition is not documented here.
The most likely points of contention are the breadth of judicial power in abduction-prevention cases, especially ex parte warrants, travel restrictions, passport surrender, supervised visitation, and bond requirements, which could be viewed as intrusive in custody disputes. Another possible area of concern is the bill’s use of immigration status, foreign-country ties, and country-specific risk factors in assessing abduction risk, which may raise fairness or due-process questions. On the adoption side, the expanded disclosure and agency-compliance requirements could prompt questions about administrative burden, confidentiality, and how much information agencies can reasonably obtain and provide.