Guardians ad litem; requiring inclusion of certain information in certain report; modifying certain training requirements. Effective date.
SB1715 revises Oklahoma law governing guardians ad litem and other court-appointed experts in contested custody and visitation cases. For guardians ad litem, the bill requires written reports to include all allegations of domestic violence, directs the Oklahoma Bar Association to create and maintain a standard operating manual covering legal duties and best practices, and requires guardians ad litem to certify they have read and will follow that manual. The bill also makes the manual publicly accessible on the Oklahoma State Courts Network and requires periodic updates every two years.
The bill also tightens rules for mediation and counseling in custody and property disputes when domestic violence or child abuse is alleged. It generally requires courts to halt or suspend mediation in those situations unless the court makes specific findings about mediator training, the victim’s ability to participate safely, and protections against power imbalances, or unless the victim requests mediation in certain domestic violence cases. In addition, the bill authorizes courts to order individual counseling for parties in custody cases if the court finds they can afford it. It also adds a penalty framework for intentionally false or frivolous child abuse or neglect accusations, including contempt, possible prosecution, custody consequences, and shifting costs and legal expenses to the accusing party.
For court experts such as parenting coordinators, guardians ad litem, and custody evaluators, SB1715 expands pre-appointment disclosure requirements and makes those disclosures non-waivable. Candidates must disclose prior relationships with parties, attorneys, or judges; provide a complete resume including required training; disclose disciplinary actions; and disclose recent criminal convictions and sex offender registration. Parties may object within 15 days and seek discovery on the expert’s qualifications before a hearing. The bill also changes domestic violence training requirements for court experts, reducing the initial training requirement from 16 hours to 6 hours while requiring 2 additional hours annually.
The bill’s impact would be to amend Sections 107.3 and 120.7 of Title 43, affecting custody, visitation, mediation, and court-expert appointment practices in family-law cases. It would place additional reporting and training obligations on guardians ad litem and court experts, increase transparency before appointments, and create more explicit safeguards in cases involving domestic violence or child abuse. It also gives courts clearer authority to respond to false allegations and to manage mediation and counseling in contested family matters.
The available context suggests no recorded committee debate or vote history, so the general sentiment cannot be measured from transcripts or roll calls. Based on the bill text, the measure appears aimed at improving accountability, safety, and professional standards in high-conflict custody cases, while also addressing concerns about false allegations. Likely points of contention include the reduced domestic violence training requirement for court experts, the mandatory inclusion of domestic violence allegations in guardian ad litem reports, the non-waivable disclosure rules, and the bill’s penalties for false abuse accusations.
SB1715 would amend Oklahoma family-law statutes governing guardians ad litem and court experts in custody and visitation proceedings. It would require more detailed reporting by guardians ad litem, mandate a Bar Association manual and certification process, expand disclosure obligations for court experts, and alter the training requirements for experts in cases involving domestic violence, stalking, or harassment. It also changes how courts handle mediation, counseling, and sanctions when domestic violence or child abuse allegations are present, affecting parties in custody, visitation, property, and separate maintenance disputes.
No committee transcript or vote record is provided, so there is no documented legislative debate to gauge support or opposition. From the bill’s structure, the measure appears to be framed as a child-safety and accountability bill, with provisions that would likely appeal to advocates for domestic violence protections and professional oversight. At the same time, the bill includes provisions that could draw concern from those worried about reduced training standards, expanded reporting obligations, or penalties tied to false allegations.
Likely points of contention include the bill’s reduction of the initial domestic violence training requirement for court experts from 16 hours to 6 hours, which could be viewed as weakening safeguards in sensitive cases. Another possible dispute is the requirement that guardians ad litem include all domestic violence allegations in written reports, which may raise confidentiality or fairness concerns. The non-waivable disclosure requirements for court experts and the bill’s sanctions for intentionally false child abuse or neglect accusations may also be controversial, particularly among litigants and advocates concerned about misuse or chilling effects in custody disputes.