These proposals have been submitted to Indiana state legislators for consideration.
Emergency Motion Response Act
Requires courts to respond to emergency motions involving child safety within defined timeframes, with reassignment to another judicial officer if unavailable and documentation of any delay.
-
A BILL FOR AN ACT
relating to response requirements for emergency motions in custody proceedings.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF INDIANA:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act shall be known and may be cited as the
“Emergency Motion Response Act.”SECTION 2. DEFINITIONS.
“Emergency motion” means any motion filed with the court alleging an immediate risk to the health, safety, or welfare of a child.
SECTION 3. EMERGENCY MOTION RESPONSE REQUIREMENTS.
(a) A court shall issue a ruling on any motion designated as an emergency within the timeframe stated in the motion, or within twenty-four (24) hours if no timeframe is specified.
(b) If the assigned judge is unavailable within the required timeframe, the motion shall be reassigned to another judicial officer for interim review.
(c) Failure to act within the required timeframe shall be documented in the case record.
(d) If a court fails to issue a ruling within the timeframe required under this section:
(1) The motion shall be automatically eligible for immediate review by an alternate judicial officer; and
(2) The delay and reason for noncompliance shall be documented in the case record.(e) A pattern of repeated noncompliance with this section shall be subject to review by the judicial oversight authority of the state.
Child Representation and Recommendation Transparency Act
Requires guardians ad litem to maintain ongoing, direct interaction with the child and to document and provide the factual basis for any recommendations relied upon by the court.
-
A BILL FOR AN ACT
relating to guardian ad litem qualifications and transparency of recommendations in custody proceedings.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF INDIANA:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act shall be known and may be cited as the
“Child Representation and Recommendation Transparency Act.”SECTION 2. DEFINITIONS.
As used in this Act:
(a) “Guardian ad litem” means any individual appointed by the court to represent or make recommendations regarding the best interests of a child.
(b) “Child-centered evaluation” means an assessment that includes direct interaction with the child and consideration of the child’s developmental, emotional, and behavioral needs.
SECTION 3. GUARDIAN AD LITEM QUALIFICATIONS AND DUTIES.
(a) A guardian ad litem appointed in any custody or parenting-time proceeding shall:
(1) Possess documented training in child development, behavioral assessment, or a related clinical field; or
(2) Work in conjunction with a licensed mental health professional who meets such qualifications.(b) A guardian ad litem shall:
(1) Maintain ongoing, direct interaction with the child throughout the duration of the case, unless documented circumstances make such interaction impracticable;
(2) Conduct a child-centered evaluation; and
(3) Base recommendations on observed and documented interactions, not solely on third-party reports.(c) The guardian ad litem shall maintain a record of:
(1) All interactions with the child;
(2) Materials reviewed; and
(3) The basis for any recommendations provided to the court.(d) Upon request by any party, subject to appropriate confidentiality protections, the guardian ad litem shall provide access to the records described in subsection (c), except where prohibited by law.
(e) Failure of a guardian ad litem to meet the requirements of this section may result in:
(1) Removal from the case;
(2) Reduction or denial of compensation; and
(3) Referral to the appropriate professional or licensing authority, if applicable.SECTION 4. TRANSPARENCY OF RECOMMENDATIONS.
(a) Any recommendation made by a guardian ad litem or court-appointed evaluator that is relied upon by the court shall include a written statement of:
(1) The information reviewed;
(2) The methods used in evaluation; and
(3) The factual basis supporting the recommendation.(b) A court shall not rely on a recommendation unless the requirements of subsection (a) are satisfied.
(c) Any party may challenge the admissibility or weight of a recommendation that fails to meet these standards.
Independent Review and Accountability Act
Establishes a confidential, independent review process outside of formal appeals, with authority to evaluate decisions, protect against retaliation, and issue interim orders when necessary.
-
A BILL FOR AN ACT
relating to the establishment of an independent review mechanism for custody-related decisions.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF INDIANA:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act shall be known and may be cited as the
“Independent Review and Accountability Act.”SECTION 2. DEFINITIONS.
As used in this Act:
(a) “Independent review” means evaluation of a judicial or quasi-judicial decision by a qualified authority not involved in the original determination.
SECTION 3. INDEPENDENT REVIEW PROCESS.
(a) The state shall establish an independent review mechanism for custody-related decisions.
(b) Independent review shall be conducted by a panel or designated authority appointed by the [State Supreme Court / Judicial Council / Administrative Office of Courts], consisting of individuals with relevant legal and, where applicable, clinical expertise.
(c) Such review shall:
(1) Be conducted by an authority not involved in the original decision;
(2) Be accessible without requiring a formal appeal;
(3) Protect the confidentiality of the requesting party; and
(4) Prohibit retaliation against any party requesting review.(d) Upon a preliminary finding that a child may be subject to immediate risk or that required procedures were not followed, the reviewing authority may:
(1) Issue a temporary or interim order necessary to protect the child pending further proceedings; or
(2) Refer the matter for immediate judicial reassignment or expedited hearing.(e) Upon completion of review, the reviewing authority may:
(1) Recommend corrective action;
(2) Require reconsideration of the decision; or
(3) Refer the matter to the appropriate oversight body.(f) No adverse action shall be taken against a party solely for requesting review under this section.
Judicial Reassignment Access Act
Allows parties to request reassignment at any stage of a case when procedural concerns arise, requires independent review of such requests, and prohibits denial based on administrative burden.
-
A BILL FOR AN ACT
relating to expanded access to judicial reassignment in custody proceedings.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF INDIANA:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act shall be known and may be cited as the
“Judicial Reassignment Access Act.”SECTION 2. JUDICIAL REASSIGNMENT.
(a) A party may request reassignment of a case to a different judge upon a showing that:
(1) Patterns of concern affecting procedural fairness have emerged; or
(2) Confidence in the impartial administration of justice has been materially compromised.(b) Such requests shall not be limited to an initial filing period and may be submitted at any stage of the proceeding.
(c) A request for reassignment shall be reviewed by an independent judicial authority and shall not be decided by the judge subject to the request.
(d) Administrative burden, case size, or the effort required to prepare or transfer records shall not constitute sufficient grounds for denial of a reassignment request.
(e) Denial of a reassignment request shall:
(1) Be issued in writing; and
(2) State specific findings supporting the denial.(f) Upon approval of reassignment, the court shall ensure timely transfer of all records necessary for continuation of proceedings.