Transcript Highlights:

• Republicans are here fighting to protect parental rights, shield children from radical gender ideology
• Republicans are here fighting to protect parental rights, shield children from radical gender ideology
• Speaker, at the end of the day, this issue is about parents and their children and the protection of
• protect students, but not do that at the expense of parental rights.
• It's about making sure parents are informed, respected, and involved, and kids are protected.

Bills: HR1300 , HB2616 , HB1993 , HCR86 , SB1003 , SB2393 , HB5317 , HB4544 , HB3234 , HR1299

Keywords: H.Res. 1300, HR1300, rules resolution, House Rules Committee, veterans affairs, VA, NICS, National Instant Criminal Background Check System, firearms background check, gun control, veteran privacy, Department of Justice, disability compensation, dependency and indemnity compensation, DIC, veterans benefits, Smithsonian American Women’s History Museum, National Mall, House procedure, floor consideration

Transcript Highlights:

• Parents are not asking schools to I hear directly from parents in my district.
• House Bill 2830 also protects parents.
• House Bill 2830 also protects parents.
• Again, it needs to stick under the parental rights there. If parents give consent.
• I was their parent.

Committees: House Education , House House Education Committee of Reference

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank yous is protected speech.
• I'm a parent of a broad. I'm I'm telling you, I'm a parent of a Broward County students.
• Do Broward parents and follow up chair Brown or their Broward parents in your school district who who
• This is what student protection and child protection in mind and it's absolutely the right thing to do
• I would hope that you'd support this, protect our children, give our families or give her parents rights

Transcript Highlights:

• Increasing the number from 75 to 100 only protects the criminals.
• This protects third parties.
• protections for some of our disabled students.
• This is about protecting the safety of our students, protecting the safety of our staff, so that teaching
• Parents do need to be part of this conversation.

Bills: HB1160 , HB1289 , HB1339 , HB1798 , HB1065 , HB1795 , HB2107 , HB2113 , HB2124 , HB2125 , HB2133 , HB2134 , HB2140 , HB2185 , HB2191 , HB2205 , HB2211 , HB2219 , HB2245 , HB2253 , HB2283 , HB2343 , HB2406 , HB2501 , HB2531 , HB2574 , HB1170 , HB1544 , HB1834 , HB2156 , HB2188 , HB2206 , HB2360 , HB2471 , HB2478 , HB2525 , HB2605 , HJM4012 , HB1104 , HB1152 , HB1254 , HB1443 , HB1710 , HB1750 , HB1903 , HB1941 , HB1974 , HB1982 , HB1983 , HB2006 , HB2034 , HB2105 , HB2179 , HB2203 , HB2215 , HB2223 , HB2239 , HB2247 , HB2297 , HB2303 , HB2322 , HB2329 , HB2334 , HB2338 , HB2345 , HB2348 , HB2350 , HB2353 , HB2355 , HB2363 , HB2367 , HB2379 , HB2388 , HB2399 , HB2418 , HB2420 , HB2428 , HB2441 , HB2462 , HB2464 , HB2467 , HB2495 , HB2505 , HB2534 , HB2539 , HB2544 , HB2551 , HB2554 , HB2557 , HB2575 , HB2577 , HB2588 , HB2594 , HB2604 , HB2636 , HB2714 , HB1160 , HB1289 , HB1339 , HB1798 , HB1065 , HB1795 , HB2113 , HB2124 , HB2125 , HB2134 , HB2140 , HB2185 , HB2191 , HB2205 , HB2211 , HB2219 , HB2245 , HB2253 , HB2283 , HB2343 , HB2406 , HB2501 , HB2574 , HB1170 , HB1544 , HB1834 , HB2156 , HB2188 , HB2206 , HB2471 , HB2478 , HB2605 , HJM4012 , HB1104 , HB1152 , HB1254 , HB1443 , HB1903 , HB1941 , HB1982 , HB2006 , HB2034 , HB2105 , HB2179 , HB2203 , HB2297 , HB2303 , HB2322 , HB2329 , HB2345 , HB2350 , HB2379 , HB2388 , HB2399 , HB2418 , HB2462 , HB2464 , HB2495 , HB2539 , HB2544 , HB2551 , HB2554 , HB2588 , HB2636 , HB1128 , HB1408 , HB1570 , HB1742 , HB1823 , HB2089 , HB2104 , HB2114 , HB2172 , HB2192 , HB2207 , HB2251 , HB2262 , HB2266 , HB2294 , HB2298 , HB2319 , HB2320 , HB2323 , HB2351 , HB2354 , HB2374 , HB2401 , HB2405 , HB2429 , HB2431 , HB2442 , HB2451 , HB2479 , HB2496 , HB2515 , HB2523 , HB2540 , HB2593 , HB2632 , HB2661 , HB1496 , HB1898 , HB2095 , HB2157 , HB2225 , HB2274 , HB2311 , HB2325 , HB2333 , HB2476 , HB2508 , HB2552

Keywords: design review, local government, land use, zoning, project permits, housing density, middle housing, affordable housing, parking minimums, single-family zoning, infill development, growth management, comprehensive plan, permit streamlining, objective development regulations, architectural review, administrative review, transit-oriented development, accessory dwelling units, ADU

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> both parents. both parents.
• but talking to many parents, mothers and fathers, anyone who is a protective parent of their child,
• It says here on line seven that parental alienation shall not include protective parents taking good-faith
• at the same time, how do you know the parents are in good faith protecting the kid?
• </c><01:38:01.840><c> the</c> parents are in good faith protecting the parents are in good faith protecting

Committee: House Children and Family Law

Transcript Highlights:

• And as Marines, we are taught that our first responsibility is to protect those who cannot protect themselves
• Elle, our parents are struggling.
• But if we see something, then we schedule a meeting with the parent for the parent to view that clip
• As a new parent entering the school system, that protection is very crucial.
• HB 1203 simply extends that same common-sense protection to parents meeting in homes, libraries, coffee

Committee: Senate Education

Summary: The Senate Education Committee met to hear several education-related measures. It reported favorably, without objection, on House Bill 1215, which would transfer certain removed historical statues and monuments to the Office of State Parks, prohibit re-erection in the parish where they were removed, and require interpretive signage. The committee also advanced House Bill 682, which creates a school guardian program for honorably discharged veterans employed or contracted by local school systems or charter schools; testimony emphasized that guardians would be unarmed, trained, and used for mentoring and school safety. House Bill 1079, giving enrollment preferences in charter schools to children in early childhood programs, military families, foster children, and children in custody disputes, was also reported favorably, as was House Concurrent Resolution 81, directing the Department of Education to study options for districts facing declining enrollment. The committee then took up House Bill 1084, which would allow public postsecondary institutions to raise tuition and mandatory fees by up to 15 percent annually, with higher increases requiring Board of Supervisors approval. The bill drew extended debate over affordability, TOPS, student retention, and whether universities should have more autonomy to set prices. Members raised concerns about fee burdens on families and whether the state should first study the issue; supporters argued the bill would increase transparency and let institutions respond to funding needs and market conditions. Senator Mazzell offered an amendment lowering the cap from 15 percent to 10 percent, and the committee adopted the amendment before reporting the bill favorably as amended. Finally, the committee heard House Bill 342, which would shift the burden of proof in special education due process hearings from parents to local education agencies. The author and parents testified that the current system places an unfair burden on families of children with disabilities, who often lack access to records and legal resources, and that schools already control the documentation and should have to show compliance with IEP obligations. Jefferson Parish school officials opposed the bill, arguing it would increase legal costs, require more staff and attorney time, and potentially lead to more hearings; they also questioned the fiscal note. The Legislative Fiscal Office said the fiscal impact was indeterminable, and the committee continued hearing testimony from parents and school representatives as the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• 00:34:35.359><c> parent,</c> parent speaking to another parent, parent speaking to another parent, that's
• parents<01:14:45.440><c> who</c><01:14:45.679><c> are</c> parents who are parents who are concerned<
• Opt-in is a protection for the parents so there's informed consent to me.
• Opt-in is a protection for the parents so there's informed consent to me.
• I don't see any reason right now why we should abandon that principle to protect the parents and have

Transcript Highlights:

• So this is focused on parents.
• So this is focused on parents.
• If a patient, a parent of a patient says, you know, if a patient, a parent of a patient says, 'You know
• health, we are not impeding on the rights of parents to make... ...that while doing our best to protect
• Florida lawmakers, please remain focused on protecting our constitutional rights and our parental rights

Summary: The committee first took up CS for SB 896 on school safety, which would expand the Guardian program to public postsecondary institutions, require active assailant response plans and threat management protocols, improve reporting and information sharing, and make it a felony to discharge a weapon within 1,000 feet of a campus. A late-file amendment by Senator Polsky was adopted to clarify that students who are also employees or faculty at a public postsecondary institution are not eligible for the Guardian program. The bill drew strong opposition from faculty, students, and gun-safety advocates who argued that more guns on campus would create confusion, weaken safety, and undermine campus police; supporters said trained guardians would improve deterrence and protection. After debate, the committee reported the bill favorably by a roll call vote. The committee then considered SB 1690 on child care and early learning services, which updates child care laws, reduces some regulatory burdens, and expands the Florida Education Foundation’s authority to fundraise for early learning from birth through VPK. Members discussed oversight of the related direct-support organization and the removal of certain notice requirements, while supporters from Moms Rising and other advocates said the bill would help families access affordable, high-quality child care and support home-based providers. One opponent argued the bill added more government regulation, but the committee adopted the amendment and reported the bill favorably. Next, the committee passed CS for SB 118, a narrow bill on non-ad valorem special assessments for recreational vehicle parks, clarifying how assessments are calculated for RV spaces and campsites. The bill received supportive comments from RV advocates and was reported favorably without controversy. The committee then took up CS for SB 1220, the Department of Transportation package, which included provisions on seaports and airports, personal delivery devices, autonomous vehicles, broadband and utility permitting, and advanced air mobility. Amendments were adopted that revised research institute membership, limited some delivery-device provisions, and clarified cruiser light rules for law enforcement; after questions about utility preemption and PDD safety, the bill was reported favorably. Finally, the committee began hearing SB 1756 on medical freedom, which would require new vaccine educational materials, expand school-entry exemptions to include conscience-based objections, limit the Surgeon General’s emergency vaccination authority, and allow behind-the-counter ivermectin for adults with written information and liability protections. The bill drew extensive testimony from both supporters and opponents, with supporters emphasizing parental rights, informed consent, and vaccine injury concerns, and opponents warning about reduced immunization rates, public health risks, and the appropriateness of ivermectin provisions. The transcript ends during public testimony and debate on SB 1756, before final action on that bill is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• And when talking to parents and when I’m doing education, many parents would tell me, like, “Oh, I could
• But as a parent, I was like, I don’t know what to do.
• It wasn't their parents.
• And can you talk a little bit more about the parents, what you did with the parents?”
• And can you talk a little bit more about the parents, what you did with the parents?

Summary: The committee met to discuss domestic violence with a focus on teen dating violence, healthy relationships, and the impact of technology on abuse. Chair Blanca Rubio opened by describing the urgency of the issue, including a recent teen murder in her district tied to domestic violence, and emphasized that restraining orders alone do not prevent abuse. The first panel featured Janica Morin Pasquale and Taylor Stone Mill, who described warning signs in teens such as constant monitoring through phones and social media, isolation from friends, jealousy normalized by online content, and control through gifts, food delivery, and access to passwords or tracking apps. They stressed that many teens do not tell parents, that parents often miss the signs, and that prevention should begin early and be reinforced in schools, homes, and youth activities. They also cited resources such as Love Is Respect, One Love, and Take It Down, and urged consistent funding and implementation of the California Healthy Youth Act rather than one-time lessons. The second panel shifted to the effects of domestic violence on children and the systems that respond to them. Joyce Blue of the Sacramento Regional Family Justice Center described the center’s wraparound services, including forensic interviews, legal help, housing support, child therapy, and high-risk response, and highlighted the prevalence and danger of strangulation, including cases with no visible injury. She explained that domestic violence is about power and control, that children often normalize abuse, and that safety planning must accompany restraining orders. Susie Flores of Inner Circle Children’s Advocacy Center explained the multidisciplinary forensic interview model used for child abuse cases, gave examples of severe abuse involving children exposed to domestic violence, and noted that many centers are overwhelmed by caseloads. She stressed the need for immediate trauma-informed services and more front-end intervention rather than waiting until long-term harm develops. Dr. Pamela Tate of Black Women Revolt Against Domestic Violence and other members discussed the need to support not only victims but also the systems and educators who are expected to respond. Several members shared personal experiences with domestic violence, sexual assault, and family trauma, and raised concerns about school implementation, immigrant families’ fear of reporting, and the need to address abusers’ behavior and trauma as well. The discussion also touched on statute of limitations issues, with panelists saying memory and trauma can delay disclosure for years and that rigid deadlines can prevent justice. No votes were taken; the meeting was informational and ended with members expressing support for continued collaboration, prevention funding, and stronger implementation of existing law.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> clear consistent consumer protections clear consistent consumer protections tailored<00:09:55.240
• protections protections that<00:15:49.560><c> the</c><00:15:49.640><c> Senator</c><00:15:49.960><c>
• That's the parents' job.
• a parent, uh, I realize parents are completely incapable of fighting this fight.
• and parents deserve recourse.

Committee: Senate Judiciary and Public Safety

Transcript Highlights:

• To protect our freedoms, most of the things we have in our Constitution are there to protect our freedoms
• And it's protecting religious freedom of expression. It's not protecting any particular religion.
• And it's protecting religious freedom of expression. It's not protecting any particular religion.
• I need to ensure our children are protected. I need to ensure our employees are protected.
• The parents didn't know what to do to protect their child because they didn't know what was happening

Summary: The committee first heard SJR 1104, a proposed constitutional amendment on voluntary religious expression in public schools. Senator Massullo said the measure would protect students and school personnel from discrimination for lawful religious expression, while not requiring prayer or religious activity. Questions focused on whether the proposal would change existing law, whether it could be used to protect coercive conduct by school officials, and whether the staff summary accurately reflected the bill. Public testimony included support from religious-freedom advocates and opposition from American Atheists and some senators who said the measure could make minority-faith students uncomfortable. The committee voted to report SJR 1104 favorably. The committee then took up SB 1738 on educational facilities, which directs state education offices to review facility requirements and recommend design and construction practices to improve safety and accountability. Senator Yarborough offered and the committee adopted an amendment removing crime-prevention-through-environmental-design language and adjusting the bill to preserve safe spaces during emergencies. The bill was reported favorably after brief discussion about balancing transparency, access control, and emergency safety. The committee also adopted a delete-all amendment to SB 824 on charter schools, replacing it with a transparency measure requiring districts to submit annual reports on unimproved land holdings to the Department of Education, which would publish a statewide report; the amended bill was then reported favorably. The committee next approved confirmation recommendations for appointees on tabs 7 and 8, then took up SPB 7036, a committee bill sponsored by Chair Simon. The package included school turnaround and early literacy changes, updates to school safety and health policies, early learning revisions, instructional changes, and educator pipeline provisions. The most contentious part was a proposal to let the state develop instructional materials; several senators questioned costs, guardrails, and whether the state should enter the textbook business. Simon said that portion was still being considered and that the bill would need safeguards if it moved forward. The committee adopted a motion to submit the bill as a committee bill and reported it favorably. Finally, the committee heard SB 1620 on public education, described by Senator Leak as a “school board members’ bill of rights.” The bill would give individual board members direct access to district documents and staff, limit district attorneys’ ability to represent both the board and administration, strengthen nepotism rules, and prohibit nondisclosure agreements for employees. Testimony from Volusia County board members, educators, and advocates was sharply divided: supporters argued the bill would improve transparency and protect minority board members, while opponents warned it could undermine superintendent authority, expose confidential student or personnel information, and create confusion in district operations. After debate, the committee voted to report SB 1620 favorably. The committee then heard SB 1170 on cameras in self-contained special education classrooms, with an amendment changing the proposal from a statewide mandate to a district policy allowing parents of students with disabilities to request cameras. Testimony was overwhelmingly supportive, centered on protecting non-speaking and vulnerable students and documenting abuse; one witness opposed the bill as an unfunded mandate. The committee was still in debate on the bill when the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• How is that protecting our? Children, I do not understand.
• Senate Bill 18 is not about protecting children.
• This bill truly does aim to protect children.
• It's about protecting children. These kinds of things.
• They're against parents. But they were there.

Bills: SB 18 , SB 19 , SB18 , SB19 , SB666 , SB688 , SB707 , SB888

Committee: Senate State Affairs

Transcript Highlights:

• Parents who did everything right during pregnancy, parents who brought home what appeared to be a healthy
• , they go after parents' children.
• , they go after parents' children.
• We know how They go after parents. They go after parents' children. We know how this all goes.
• In fact, a positive screen gives parents information.

Transcript Highlights:

• It is under the purview of the parent, and that is stated in state statute. Of the parent.
• In fact, this bill does not protect parental choice. Parents should have a voice.
• In fact, this bill does not protect parental choice. It actually removes it.
• I'm allowing that up to the parents, because I will tell you, we've had parents speak in our board meetings
• Because districts do not give the real story to parents, parents deserve to know the truth when something

Committee: Senate Senate Education Committee of Reference

Summary: The committee first considered the executive nomination of John Snyder to the State Board for Charter Schools. Snyder described his background in municipal finance, charter school financings, and prior service with Arizona charter school organizations, and said his finance experience would help the board evaluate school viability and oversight. The committee voted 6-0 with one not voting to recommend his confirmation to the full Senate. The committee then heard HB 2093, which would remove the statutory requirement that health education include mental health instruction and would repeal related consultation requirements over time. The sponsor argued schools should focus on academics and that social-emotional learning and mental health content belong with parents, while opponents, including students, a suicide-loss parent, and mental health advocates, said school-based instruction saves lives, helps students seek help, and preserves parental choice through opt-out provisions. After debate, the committee voted 4-3 to give HB 2093 a do pass recommendation. Members also considered HB 4043, requiring at least one campus employee trained in CPR, first aid, and AED use where applicable; HB 4005, requiring districts to teach ethical and educational uses of AI beginning in 2027-28; HB 2895, allowing Native American language proficiency to satisfy a world language graduation requirement; HB 2383, renaming trampoline court safety legislation as Ty’s Law; HB 4109, requiring school district public safety policies, notifications, and annual reporting after serious violence or weapon incidents; HB 2376, appropriating $40 million for the school safety program; and HB 2380, requiring public access to board meeting materials and tighter rules on out-of-state travel. HB 4043, HB 2895, and HB 2383 all received unanimous or near-unanimous do pass recommendations, while HB 4005, HB 4109, HB 2376, and HB 2380 each advanced on 4-3 votes, with some members citing concerns about unfunded mandates, criminal penalties, local control, or the scope and timing of required disclosures.

Transcript Highlights:

• over it are fundamental and parents over it are fundamental and protected<00:45:04.760><c> under</c>
• </c><00:55:21.839><c> knows</c> parental love and parental rights knows parental love and parental rights
• supporting supporting supporting parents<00:56:07.520><c> in</c> parents in parents in parenting<00:
• And it also protects children's privacy and safety by requiring parental consent for biometric data collection
• </c> parents library card and if the parent parents library card and if the parent wishes<06:03:13.600

Summary: The House opened with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, the national anthem, leaves of absence, guest introductions, and memorial remarks honoring former Representative Carolyn Gargas of Hollis, who was remembered for her long House service, work on child and family issues, and community involvement. The House then adopted a consent calendar and approved a motion to withdraw House Bill 431, which would have created a commission to review draft rules on minimum standards for public school approval and state academic standards; the motion failed after a roll call vote, so the bill remained in play. The House next took up House Bill 109-FN, relative to false reports to law enforcement. The majority supported the bill as a way to add penalties for knowingly false reports about law enforcement officers, arguing officers deserve protection from false accusations and that the knowingly standard is a high bar. The minority opposed it as duplicative of existing law and warned it could chill legitimate complaints against police. After debate and a division vote, the majority committee report of ought to pass was adopted, 198-173. The House also considered House Bill 218-FN, which would provide victims of crime a free police report. The committee amendment changed the bill so victims would receive a written confirmation that a crime occurred rather than the initial police report, to avoid conflicts with right-to-know law and active-investigation confidentiality. Supporters said the change was a small but important clarification agreed to by law enforcement and domestic violence advocates, while opponents argued the original language was already workable and that the floor amendment was unnecessary. A division vote was requested on the amendment, and the transcript ends during that debate before the final outcome on HB 218 is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• Parents are not asking schools to I hear directly from parents in my district.
• House Bill 2830 also protects parents.
• Again, it needs to stick under parental rights there. If parents give consent.
• I was their parent.
• I was their parent.

Committee: House House Education Committee of Reference

Summary: The committee heard testimony on House Bill 2076, which would create a program and fund within ADE, in consultation with AZPOST, to reimburse eligible schools and employees for approved training, certification, and school safety equipment, and would allow schools to adopt policies permitting certain employees to carry concealed firearms on campus if they meet training, notification, and confidentiality requirements. The sponsor, Rep. Bliss, framed the bill as an optional, fiscally responsible medical-response measure focused on bleeding control and emergency preparedness, not a mandate to arm schools. Supporters said the bill adds guardrails, expands access to training, and could help staff respond in emergencies. Opponents, including Giffords, Arizona for Gun Safety, and the Arizona Education Association, argued it would normalize firearms in classrooms, create confidentiality and law-enforcement concerns, expose students and staff to new risks, and divert attention from prevention, mental health, and other school safety investments. After debate, the committee voted 6-5-1 to give HB 2076 a do-pass recommendation. The committee then took up House Bill 2830, which directs the State Board of Education to adopt science standards requiring instruction on fetal and prenatal development and specifies that the content is not sex education. Supporters, including the sponsor, a school board president, and a biology teacher, said the bill is about age-appropriate, medically accurate science, parental rights, and clear statewide guidance. Opponents, including the AEA and Reproductive Freedom for All, said it fragments science instruction, politicizes the curriculum, and omits the broader reproductive and public health context students need. Members debated whether fetal development can be taught without discussing reproduction, and whether the bill is an education measure or an anti-abortion effort. The committee approved HB 2830 on an 8-4 vote. The transcript also included discussion of House Bill 2093, which would repeal required mental health instruction and social-emotional learning in schools; supporters argued it restores parental control and refocuses schools on academics, while opponents said school-based mental health education saves lives and helps students who may not have support at home.

Transcript Highlights:

• birth parents.
• and their families, not to protect birth parents.
• and their families, not to protect birth parents.
• California birth parents do not need protection from our children.
• In the state of California, we protect that right. I mean, we protect that right.

Committee: Senate Judiciary

Transcript Highlights:

• It's failed parents, just like me. Respectfully, Mr.
• Our parents deserve better.
• Let's put parents in the driver's seat.
• Every parent wants that opportunity for their child.
• And I just had their parent-teacher conference.

Committee: Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee

Keywords: educational reform, federal grants, bureaucracy, wealth disparity, public testimony

Summary: The committee meeting engaged in discussions focused primarily on educational reform, the influence of federal grants on local education systems, and the growing disparities in wealth and access to quality education. Members expressed concerns about the bureaucracy surrounding federal funding that hampers schools' ability to obtain necessary resources for improvement. Several members highlighted personal anecdotes from constituents, emphasizing the urgent need for reform to help students succeed in both K-12 and higher education environments. The meeting included public testimonies that provided insights into various community perspectives on these pressing issues.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> in divorce and parenting cases in 2023. in divorce and parenting cases in 2023.
• </c> acknowledge that um for parenting cases acknowledge that um for parenting cases so<00:35:57.359>
• case</c><00:38:19.680><c> and</c> their parenting um uh parenting case and their parenting um uh parenting
• </c> parenting area. parenting area. Neutral<01:00:18.000><c> case</c><01:00:18.319><c> evaluation.
• Now, a parent, for whatever reason, has difficulty filling out, let's say, the parenting plan.

Summary: The subcommittee met to continue its review of recommendations for New Hampshire’s family court, with the chair emphasizing a collaborative approach and noting that the group would focus on the origins of the family division, recurring problems identified in earlier reports, and comparisons with other states. Members discussed organizing testimony into three broad topics: the court hearing process and pro se litigant preparation, mediation/arbitration/counseling, and the interaction of domestic violence issues with family court and related criminal proceedings. The chair also noted that the subcommittee would not meet again for two weeks and encouraged members to review materials from Judge Michael Mace and NCSL research on other states’ family court systems. Attorney Heather Culp, senior administrator for the judicial branch’s circuit court, testified about New Hampshire’s ADR programs. She explained that the Office of Mediation and Arbitration, created by statute in 2007, oversees more than 12 statewide ADR programs across the Supreme, Superior, and Circuit Courts, including family division programs such as divorce-parenting mediation, neutral case evaluation, guardianship, termination of parental rights, and voluntary adoption mediation. She said the divorce-parenting mediation program is the largest family division ADR program, with about 3,400 mediation sessions in 2023 out of roughly 6,700 cases, and that most cases involving minor children are referred to mediation soon after the first appearance session. Culp described the family division process as beginning with a first appearance session led by a case manager, who provides information, helps with paperwork, and schedules mediation, usually within 30 to 45 days. She said mediation is strongly encouraged in parenting and divorce cases, but there is no requirement to reach agreement, and parties may settle some issues while leaving others for court. She also explained that mediation is prohibited or limited in certain domestic violence cases: cases with active civil protection orders may proceed only with both parties’ consent and possible safeguards, while cases involving criminal protective orders are not sent to mediation. Mediators in court-referred family cases are contracted with the court and must be certified by the executive branch’s mediator certification board; mediators do not communicate with judges, except through a brief ADR report noting whether the case settled or what the next procedural step is. Members asked about referrals, timing, and the meaning of “neutrals,” and Culp said the court uses in-house contracted neutrals for family division ADR and does not refer divorce-parenting cases to outside providers.

Transcript Highlights:

• And so it does a better job of protecting them and making sure that the parents know what took place
• Parents deserve transparency.
• These protections support ethical providers.
• These protections support ethical providers, protect families, and most importantly protect children.
• When I speak with these parents, I hear the regret.

Committee: Senate Health and Welfare