Bill Text: HI SB2395 | 2022 | Regular Session | Introduced
Bill Title: Relating To Coercive Control.
Spectrum: Partisan Bill (Democrat 1-0)
Status: (Engrossed - Dead) 2022-03-10 - Referred to HHH, JHA, referral sheet 24 [SB2395 Detail]
Download: Hawaii-2022-SB2395-Introduced.html
|
THE SENATE |
S.B. NO. |
2395 |
|
THIRTY-FIRST LEGISLATURE, 2022 |
|
|
|
STATE OF HAWAII |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
||
A BILL FOR AN ACT
relating to coercive control.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF HAWAII:
SECTION 1. The legislature finds that individuals who
abuse their intimate partners have been known to misuse court proceedings to
control, harass, intimidate, coerce, or impoverish the abused partner. This litigation abuse occurs in a variety of
contexts. In family court, abusers have used
cases involving dissolution, legal separation, parenting plan action or
modification, a protection order, or child custody to harm or exploit their
partner and children's wellbeing.
Abusers have also filed meritless civil lawsuits alleging breach of
contract, defamation, or another tort to force the abused partner to spend time,
money, and emotional resources responding to the lawsuit. Due to the lengthy nature of legal
proceedings, litigation abuse can extend long after the relationship has ended.
The legislature also finds that when child
custody is under consideration, courts should also be aware that coercive
control is a tactic that has been used by perpetrators to harm and exploit
their partner and children's wellbeing. When
courts are evaluating the best and safest way to issue custody orders, acts of
coercive control should be included in the analysis.
The purpose of this Act is to add coercive
control to the list of factors to be considered by the court in determining
what constitutes the best interest of the child.
SECTION 2. Section 586-1, Hawaii Revised Statutes, is amended as follows:
1. By adding a new definition to be appropriately inserted and to read as follows:
""Litigation abuse"
means:
(1) (A) The opposing parties have a current
or former intimate partner relationship;
(B) The
party who is filing, initiating, advancing, or continuing the litigation:
(i) Is
a restrained party under a temporary restraining order;
(ii) Has
been arrested for violation of chapter 586 or 709; or
(iii) Has
been the subject of an investigation by child welfare services branch of the department
of human services; and
(C) The
litigation is being initiated, advanced, or continued primarily for the purpose
of harassing, intimidating, or maintaining contact with the other party; and
(2) At least one of
the following factors:
(A) Claims,
allegations, and other legal contentions made in the litigation are not warranted
by existing law or by a reasonable argument for the extension, modification, or
reversal of existing law, or the establishment of new law;
(B) Allegations
and other factual contentions made in the litigation are without evidentiary support;
or
(C) The
issue or issues that are the basis of the litigation have previously been contested
in one or more courts and the actions have been litigated and disposed of
unfavorably to the party filing, initiating, advancing, or continuing the
litigation."
2. By amending the definition of "coercive control" to read as follows:
""Coercive control" means a pattern of threatening, humiliating, or intimidating actions, which may include assaults, or other abuse that is used to harm, punish, or frighten an individual. "Coercive control" includes a pattern of behavior that seeks to take away the individual's liberty or freedom and strip away the individual's sense of self, including bodily integrity and human rights, whereby the "coercive control" is designed to make an individual dependent by isolating them from support, exploiting them, depriving them of independence, and regulating their everyday behavior including:
(1) Isolating the individual from friends and family;
(2) Controlling how much money is accessible to the individual and how it is spent;
(3) Monitoring the individual's activities, communications, and movements;
(4) Name-calling, degradation, and demeaning the individual frequently;
(5) Threatening to harm or kill the individual or a child or relative of the individual;
(6) Threatening to publish information or make reports to the police or the authorities;
(7) Damaging property
or household goods; [and]
(8) Forcing the individual
to take part in criminal activity or child abuse[.]; and
(9) Litigation abuse."
SECTION 3. Section 571-46, Hawaii Revised Statutes, is amended by amending subsection (b) to read as follows:
"(b) In determining what
constitutes the best interest of the child under this section, the court shall
consider, but not be limited to, the following:
(1) Any
history of sexual or physical abuse of a child by a parent;
(2) Any
history of neglect or emotional abuse of a child by a parent;
(3) The
overall quality of the parent-child relationship;
(4) The
history of caregiving or parenting by each parent prior and subsequent to a marital
or other type of separation;
(5) Each
parent's cooperation in developing and implementing a plan to meet the child's
ongoing needs, interests, and schedule; provided that this factor shall not be
considered in any case where the court has determined that family violence has
been committed by a parent;
(6) The
physical health needs of the child;
(7) The
emotional needs of the child;
(8) The
safety needs of the child;
(9) The
educational needs of the child;
(10) The
child's need for relationships with siblings;
(11) Each
parent's actions demonstrating that they allow the child to maintain family
connections through family events and activities; provided that this factor
shall not be considered in any case where the court has determined that family
violence has been committed by a parent;
(12) Each
parent's actions demonstrating that they separate the child's needs from the
parent's needs;
(13) Any
evidence of past or current drug or alcohol abuse by a parent;
(14) The
mental health of each parent;
(15) The
areas and levels of conflict present within the family; [and]
(16) A
parent's prior wilful misuse of the protection from abuse process under chapter
586 to gain a tactical advantage in any proceeding involving the custody
determination of a minor. Such wilful
misuse may be considered only if it is established by clear and convincing
evidence, and if it is further found by clear and convincing evidence that in
the particular family circumstance the wilful misuse tends to show that, in the
future, the parent who engaged in the wilful misuse will not be able to
cooperate successfully with the other parent in their shared responsibilities
for the child. The court shall articulate
findings of fact whenever relying upon this factor as part of its determination
of the best interests of the child. For
the purposes of this section, when taken alone, the voluntary dismissal of a
petition for protection from abuse shall not be treated as prima facie evidence
that a wilful misuse of the protection from abuse process has occurred[.];
and
(17) Any history of coercive control of the child or a parent of the child by the other parent. For the purposes of this paragraph "coercive control" shall have the same meaning as in section 586-1."
SECTION 4. This Act does not affect rights and duties that matured, penalties that were incurred, and proceedings that were begun before its effective date.
SECTION 5. Statutory material to be repealed is bracketed and stricken. New statutory material is underscored.
SECTION 6. This Act shall take effect upon its approval.
|
INTRODUCED BY: |
_____________________________ |
|
|
|
Report Title:
Judiciary; Domestic Abuse; Coercive Control
Description:
Adds litigation abuse to the factors a court may consider in finding that a person illegally abused, harmed, punished, or frightened another individual.
The summary description
of legislation appearing on this page is for informational purposes only and is
not legislation or evidence of legislative intent.
