Oklahoma Senate Bill SB163

Oklahoma 2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/3/25
• Refer: 2/4/25

Caption

Child custody; defining term. Effective date.

Summary

SB 163 amends Oklahoma’s child custody statute to add and clarify definitions and factors a court must consider when deciding custody, joint custody, visitation, and guardianship for a minor child. The bill keeps the existing “best interests of the child” standard, but expands the statute’s language on joint custody plans, modification of those plans, termination of joint custody, and the use of arbitration to resolve disputes between parents sharing custody. A major feature of the bill is its detailed treatment of abuse- and violence-related issues in custody cases. It creates a rebuttable presumption that custody or shared parenting with a parent who has committed child abuse, domestic violence, stalking, or harassment is not in the child’s best interest. It also defines “coercive control” and folds that conduct into the domestic violence framework, while directing courts to prioritize the safety and well-being of the child and the nonoffending parent. The bill further states that a parent’s absence or relocation caused by domestic violence should not be held against that parent in custody or visitation decisions.

Impact

SB 163 would amend 43 O.S. Section 109, the core Oklahoma custody statute, by adding statutory definitions and more specific judicial standards for custody disputes. It would affect family courts, divorcing or separating parents, guardianship proceedings, and any case involving joint custody or allegations of abuse, domestic violence, stalking, or harassment. The bill would also give courts clearer authority to reject, modify, or terminate joint custody arrangements and to appoint an arbitrator for disputes over joint custody plans.

Sentiment

The available record shows no committee transcript or recorded votes, so there is no documented debate or formal vote history to gauge support or opposition. Based on the bill text, the measure appears designed to strengthen child-safety protections in custody cases while preserving judicial discretion under the best-interests standard. The overall tone of the bill is protective and procedural rather than controversial on its face.

Contention

The most likely points of contention are the expanded definitions of domestic violence and coercive control, and the rebuttable presumption against custody or shared parenting with an offending parent. Those provisions could be viewed as strengthening protections for victims and children, but also as potentially broadening the circumstances under which a parent may lose custody or visitation rights. Another possible issue is the bill’s arbitration provision for joint custody disputes, including the consequence that refusal to consent to arbitration may allow the court to terminate joint custody.