SB 3331: Family Safety; Year of Resilience, Safety, and Survivor Justice; Coercive Control; Economic Abuse; Protective Parents Rights; Neurodivergent Child Protections; Reproductive Privacy; Automatic Protective Orders; Child Welfare Ombudsman; Family Violence Docket

THE SENATE	S.B. NO.	3331
THIRTY-THIRD LEGISLATURE, 2026
STATE OF HAWAII

A BILL FOR AN ACT

 

 

relating to FAMILY safety.

 

 

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF HAWAII:

 

PART I

     SECTION 1.  The purpose of this part is to designate the calendar year 2027 as the "Year of Resilience, Safety, and Survivor Justice".

     SECTION 2.  (a)  The calendar year 2027 shall be known and designated as the "Year of Resilience, Safety, and Survivor Justice".

     (b)  During the calendar year 2027, the State commits to:

     (1)  Uplifting survivor voices;

     (2)  Strengthening family court practices;

     (3)  Improving community-based support systems;

     (4)  Investing in trauma-informed services;

     (5)  Expanding access to safety, legal protection, and healing;

     (6)  Advancing culturally grounded approaches; and

     (7)  Implementing the comprehensive reforms contained in this Act.

     (c)  The State shall support public education, community partnerships, and survivor-led initiatives aligned with the Year of Resilience, Safety, and Survivor Justice.

     (d)  State agencies may collaborate with domestic violence service providers, cultural practitioners, youth- and family-serving nonprofits organizations, and survivor-led organizations to advance awareness and prevention.

PART II

     SECTION 3.  The legislature finds that Hawaii's statutory definitions of "harm", "child abuse or neglect", and related terms are outdated and fail to reflect modern science on trauma, psychological violence, coercive control, and non-visible injuries.  Abuse does not require visible injuries, and emotional harm can be more damaging than physical harm.

     The purpose of this part is to modernize statutory definitions to protect children from all forms of harm.

     SECTION 4.  Chapter 587A, Hawaii Revised Statutes, is amended by adding a new section to be appropriately designated and to read as follows:

     "§587A-     Disability and neurodivergence non-justification.  (a)  A condition or injury shall not be considered justifiably explained nor shall maltreatment be excused, minimized, or dismissed on the basis of:

     (1)  A child's disability;

     (2)  Neurodivergence, autism, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, or developmental delay;

     (3)  A mental health diagnosis;

     (4)  Trauma-related or sensory-related behaviors;

     (5)  Behavioral challenges; or

     (6)  Communication differences.

     (b)  Disability or neurodivergence shall not justify:

     (1)  Physical force or restraint;

     (2)  Humiliation or degradation;

     (3)  Emotional maltreatment; or

     (4)  Isolation or coercion."

     SECTION 5.  Section 350-1, Hawaii Revised Statutes, is amended by amending the definition of "child abuse or neglect" to read as follows:

     ""Child abuse or neglect" [means:

     (1)  The acts or omissions of any person who, or legal entity which, is in any manner or degree related to the child, is residing with the child, or is otherwise responsible for the child's care, that have resulted in the physical or psychological health or welfare of the child, who is under the age of eighteen, to be harmed, or to be subject to any reasonably foreseeable, substantial risk of being harmed.  The acts or omissions are indicated for the purposes of reports by circumstances that include but are not limited to:

          (A)  When the child exhibits evidence of:

               (i)  Substantial or multiple skin bruising or any other internal bleeding;

              (ii)  Any injury to skin causing substantial bleeding;

             (iii)  Malnutrition;

              (iv)  Failure to thrive;

               (v)  Burn or burns;

              (vi)  Poisoning;

             (vii)  Fracture of any bone;

            (viii)  Subdural hematoma;

              (ix)  Soft tissue swelling;

               (x)  Extreme pain;

              (xi)  Extreme mental distress;

             (xii)  Gross degradation; or

            (xiii)  Death; and

               such injury is not justifiably explained, or when the history given concerning such condition or death is at variance with the degree or type of such condition or death, or circumstances indicate that such condition or death may not be the product of an accidental occurrence;

          (B)  When the child has been the victim of sexual contact or conduct, including but not limited to sexual assault as defined in the Penal Code, molestation, sexual fondling, incest, or prostitution; obscene or pornographic photographing, filming, or depiction; or other similar forms of sexual exploitation, including but not limited to acts that constitute an offense pursuant to section 712-1202(1)(b);

          (C)  When there exists injury to the psychological capacity of a child as is evidenced by an observable and substantial impairment in the child's ability to function;

          (D)  When the child is not provided in a timely manner with adequate food, clothing, shelter, psychological care, physical care, medical care, or supervision;

          (E)  When the child is provided with dangerous, harmful, or detrimental drugs as defined by section 712-1240; provided that this subparagraph shall not apply when such drugs are provided to the child pursuant to the direction or prescription of a practitioner, as defined in section 712-1240; or

          (F)  When the child has been the victim of labor trafficking under chapter 707; or

     (2)  The acts or omissions of any person that have resulted in sex trafficking or severe forms of trafficking in persons; provided that no finding by the department pursuant to this chapter shall be used as conclusive evidence that a person has committed an offense under part VIII of chapter 707 or section 712-1202.]

has the same meaning as in section 587A-4."

     SECTION 6.  Section 587A-4, Hawaii Revised Statutes, is amended as follows:

     1.  By adding a new definition to be appropriately inserted and to read:

     ""Child abuse or neglect" means any act by a parent, guardian, caregiver, custodian, household member, or any person responsible for the care or supervision of a child that causes, or is reasonably likely to cause, harm to the child's physical, emotional, psychological, developmental, or dignity-based well-being.  "Child abuse or neglect" does not require:

     (1)  Visible injury;

     (2)  Extreme pain;

     (3)  Bruising, fractures, or physical marks;

     (4)  Objectively observable impairment;

     (5)  Medical confirmation of injury; or

     (6)  Physical evidence of harm.

"Child abuse or neglect" may consist of a pattern of behavior or a single severe incident."

     2.  By amending the definition of "harm" to read:

     ""Harm" [has the same meaning as "child abuse or neglect" as defined in section 350-1.] means any damage or injury to a child's physical, emotional, psychological, developmental, or dignity-based well-being, including but not limited to:

     (1)  Physical harm, whether or not visible;

     (2)  Emotional or psychological harm, including intimidation, humiliation, manipulation, isolation, or coercion;

     (3)  Exposure to domestic abuse or coercive control;

     (4)  Neglect or deprivation, excluding poverty alone;

     (5)  Sexual harm, including exploitation or grooming;

     (6)  Digital or online exploitation;

     (7)  Commercial exploitation; or

     (8)  Endangerment that creates a substantial risk of harm."

PART III

     SECTION 7.  The legislature finds that coercive control is a leading predictor of lethal violence and must be recognized under state law.  Existing state law focuses on physical acts, leaving victims of non-physical abuse without protection.

     The purpose of this part is to define coercive control and integrate this definition into the domestic violence and child protection statutes.

     SECTION 8.  Chapter 586, Hawaii Revised Statutes, is amended by adding a new part to be appropriately designated and to read as follows:

"Part    .  COERCIVE control and domestic violence modernization

     §586-     Coercive control as domestic abuse.  Coercive control shall constitute domestic abuse for purposes of petitions for temporary restraining orders, protective orders, custody determinations, and all forms of family-court relief.  No physical injury shall be required.

     §586-     Duties of the court.  In addition to any other duties or responsibilities of the court, the court shall:

     (1)  Identify and make findings on coercive control whenever raised;

     (2)  Prioritize child safety and adult victim safety;

     (3)  Consider coercive control as a factor against custody, visitation, and shared decision-making;

     (4)  Not penalize parents for leaving an abuser or protecting a child; and

     (5)  Consider litigation abuse as domestic abuse.

     §586-     Training requirements.  (a)  The following individuals shall receive training pursuant to subsection (b):

     (1)  Judges;

     (2)  Guardians ad litem;

     (3)  Custody evaluators;

     (4)  Child welfare services workers;

     (5)  Law enforcement officers;

     (6)  Mediators; and

     (7)  Court-appointed professionals.

     (b)  The individuals listed in subsection (a) shall receive the following training:

     (1)  Trauma dynamics;

     (2)  Coercive control;

     (3)  Emotional and psychological abuse;

     (4)  Disability and neurodivergence issues;

     (5)  Litigation abuse;

     (6)  Financial abuse;

     (7)  Effects on children;

     (8)  System-based abuse; and

     (9)  Digital abuse."

     SECTION 9.  Chapter 587A, Hawaii Revised Statutes, is amended by adding a new section to be appropriately designated and to read as follows:

     "§587A-     Coercive control.  (a)  A child's exposure to coercive control shall constitute harm and child abuse or neglect, regardless of whether the child is physically touched.

     (b)  For purposes of this section, "coercive control" has the same meaning as in section 586-1.

     SECTION 10.  Section 586-1, Hawaii Revised Statutes, is amended 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.]

behavior, or a single severe incident, that unreasonably interferes with a person's autonomy, physical or emotional safety, or ability to maintain connections with others.  "Coercive control" includes intimidation and threats; emotional and psychological abuse; isolation; monitoring, surveillance, and stalking; economic and financial abuse; reproductive and sexual coercion; litigation abuse, including legal, administrative, and system abuse; child manipulation and leverage; digital abuse; and disability or neurodivergence-related abuse."

PART IV

     SECTION 11.  The legislature finds that family courts have allowed litigation abuse and pseudoscientific theories like parental alienation to harm children and protective parents.

     The purpose of this part is to prioritize child safety, prohibit parental alienation theories, and sanction parties who participate in abusive litigation tactics.

     SECTION 12.  Chapter 571, Hawaii Revised Statutes, is amended by adding ten new sections to be appropriately designated and to read as follows:

     "§571-     Diagnosis shopping.  (a)  Diagnosis shopping shall constitute coercive control, emotional abuse of the child, and system-based abuse of the protective parent.

     (b)  No court shall admit or rely upon any evaluation obtained through diagnosis shopping.

     (c)  Attorneys or evaluators who knowingly engage in or facilitate diagnosis shopping shall be subject to sanctions.

     §571-     Protective parent.  A protective parent shall not be penalized for:

     (1)  Seeking safety;

     (2)  Reporting abuse;

     (3)  Securing treatment for the child; or

     (4)  Limiting contact when the child is distressed or fearful.

     §571-     Prohibition on parental alienation.  (a)  The concept of parental alienation, including its variants, shall not be recognized in the State.

     (b)  No court shall admit testimony, reports, evaluations, or evidence based on:

     (1)  Parental alienation;

     (2)  Parental alienation syndrome;

     (3)  Gatekeeping assumptions;

     (4)  Parental alignment theories;

     (5)  Family systems enmeshment used to discredit abuse; and

     (6)  Coaching allegations made without evidence.

     (c)  Any attempt by attorneys, evaluators, or parties to introduce parental-alienation-based theories shall result in:

     (1)  Exclusion of testimony;

     (2)  Fee shifting;

     (3)  Sanctions;

     (4)  Disqualification; and

     (5)  Referral to the office of disciplinary counsel.

     §571-     Child's right to refuse unsafe or distressing visitation.  (a)  A child's refusal to visit or spend time with a parent shall not result in penalties to the protective parent where:

     (1)  The child expresses fear, discomfort, trauma, or distress;

     (2)  There is evidence or concern of coercive control;

     (3)  The child witnessed abuse;

     (4)  The child has been the subject of emotional harm;

     (5)  The child's boundaries have been violated; or

     (6)  The child's developmental or emotional needs indicate distress.

     (b)  Forcing visitation over the child's objection shall be prohibited.

     (c)  Courts shall make written findings before any compelled visitation.

     §571-     Protective parent standard.  (a)  A child shall not be removed from a protective parent except in extraordinary circumstances supported by clear and convincing evidence of:

     (1)  Immediate danger to the child; and

     (2)  Lack of reasonable protective alternatives.

     (b)  A parent who acts to protect a child from abuse shall not be deemed uncooperative, obstructive, or alienating.

     §571-     Slanderous or abusive declarations; prohibited.  (a)  Courts shall strike any filing that contains:

     (1)  Humiliation, degradation, irrelevant personal or sexual information;

     (2)  Reproductive history;

     (3)  Medical shaming;

     (4)  Derogatory character attacks;

     (5)  Speculative accusations without evidence; or

     (6)  Abusive rhetoric.

     (b)  Attorneys submitting such filings shall be subject to sanctions.

     §571-     Litigation abuse; remedies and sanctions.  (a)  The court shall identify and sanction litigation abuse, including by:

     (1)  Fee shifting;

     (2)  Contempt;

     (3)  Limiting filings;

     (4)  Issuing protective orders;

     (5)  Ordering therapy or education for the abusive parent;

     (6)  Restricting custody or decision-making authority;

     (7)  Subjecting attorneys to sanctions; or

     (8)  Referring attorneys to the office of disciplinary counsel.

     §571-     Temporary restraining order; use against a parent; prohibited.  Dismissal of a temporary restraining order, whether voluntary, procedural, or evidentiary, shall not be used to:

     (1)  Penalize a parent;

     (2)  Assume false reporting;

     (3)  Assume malicious intent; or

     (4)  Alter custody without further findings.

     §571-     Judicial duties.  Judges shall:

     (1)  Consider coercive control in all custody cases;

     (2)  Make written findings where survivors allege abuse;

     (3)  Prioritize child emotional safety;

     (4)  Ensure children are not forced into unsafe contact;

     (5)  Reject pseudoscientific evidence;

     (6)  Recognize trauma behaviors; and

     (7)  Treat litigation abuse as domestic abuse.

     §571-     Mandatory training.  (a)  The following shall receive training pursuant to subsection (b):

     (1)  Judges;

     (2)  Guardians ad litem;

     (3)  Custody evaluators;

     (4)  Child welfare services workers;

     (5)  Mediators; and

     (6)  Court-appointed therapists.

     (b)  The individuals listed in subsection (a) shall receive the following training:

     (1)  Coercive control;

     (2)  Trauma science;

     (3)  Litigation abuse;

     (4)  Child development;

     (5)  Disability and neurodivergence;

     (6)  Diagnosis shopping;

     (7)  Emotional and psychological harm;

     (8)  How abusers manipulate systems."

     SECTION 13.  Section 571-2, Hawaii Revised Statutes, is amended by adding five new definitions to be appropriately inserted and to read as follows:

     ""Court-facilitated abuse" means any situation in which judicial processes, orders, procedures, delays, filings, or failure to act allow, enable, assist, or amplify abuse, coercive control, or harm to a child or protective parent.

"Court-facilitated abuse" includes but is not limited to:

     (1)  Minimizing or dismissing coercive control;

     (2)  Ignoring patterns of psychological or emotional abuse;

     (3)  Compelling a child to have contact with an abusive parent;

     (4)  Penalizing a protective parent for respecting a child's trauma;

     (5)  Reliance on pseudoscientific theories, including parental alienation;

     (6)  Failure to sanction litigation abuse;

     (7)  Ordering reunification with an abusive parent;

     (8)  Ignoring financial abuse;

     (9)  Accepting abusive declarations or degrading submissions;

    (10)  Treating abuse as high conflict; and

    (11)  Failing to consider emotional safety.

     "Diagnosis shopping" means seeking, pressuring, coercing, influencing, or manipulating any medical, psychological, psychiatric, developmental, educational, or behavioral professional to obtain a diagnosis, label, assessment, or characterization of a child or parent that:

     (1)  Is intended to justify physical force, humiliation, coercive control, or harmful treatment;

     (2)  Misattributes trauma responses or fear-based behaviors to purported disability;

     (3)  Is sought to manipulate custody, visitation, or child welfare services involvement;

     (4)  Is used to discredit, undermine, or punish a protective parent;

     (5)  Is inconsistent with legitimate clinical standards;

     (6)  Is used to pathologize normal trauma reactions; or

     (7)  Is used to override the child's expressed fear, trauma, or distress.

     "Litigation abuse" means misuse of court procedures to harass, intimidate, exhaust, manipulate, dominate, financially harm, or discredit another party, including but not limited to:

     (1)  Repeated or frivolous motions;

     (2)  Excessive discovery;

     (3)  Refusal to comply with orders;

     (4)  Abusive declarations;

     (5)  Evidence manipulation;

     (6)  Subpoenas used to intimidate;

     (7)  Delay tactics;

     (8)  Filing complaints or reports in bad faith;

     (9)  Cross-filing temporary restraining orders or petitions to intimidate; and

    (10)  Threats of litigation to force concessions.

"Litigation abuse" constitutes domestic abuse and coercive control.

     "Protective parent" means a legal parent who acts in good faith to protect a child from harm, including by respecting the child's expression of fear, trauma, or refusal of visitation.

     "Slanderous or abusive court submissions" includes:

     (1)  Filings containing humiliation, degradation, irrelevant sexual or reproductive information, private medical history, or character attacks;

     (2)  Filings intended to shame, intimidate, punish, or publicly humiliate;

     (3)  Defamatory statements offered without evidence; and

     (4)  Abusive declarations used to manipulate court perception."

     SECTION 14.  Section 571-46, Hawaii Revised Statutes, is amended by amending subsection (a) to read as follows:

     "(a)  In actions for divorce, separation, annulment, separate maintenance, or any other proceeding where there is at issue a dispute as to the custody of a minor child, the court, during the pendency of the action, at the final hearing, or any time during the minority of the child, may make an order for the custody of the minor child as may seem necessary or proper.  In awarding the custody, the court shall be guided by the following standards, considerations, and procedures:

     (1)  Custody should be awarded to either parent or to both parents according to the best interests of the child, [and the court also may consider frequent, continuing, and meaningful contact of each parent with the child] unless the court finds that a parent is unable to act in the best interest of the child;

     (2)  Custody may be awarded to persons other than the father or mother whenever the award serves the best interest of the child.  Any person who has had de facto custody of the child in a stable and wholesome home and is a fit and proper person shall be entitled prima facie to an award of custody;

     (3)  If a child is of sufficient age and capacity to reason, so as to form an intelligent preference, the child's wishes as to custody shall be considered and be given due weight by the court;

     (4)  Whenever good cause appears therefor, the court may require an investigation and report concerning the care, welfare, and custody of any minor child of the parties.  When so directed by the court, investigators or professional personnel attached to or assisting the court, hereinafter referred to as child custody evaluators, shall make investigations and reports that shall be made available to all interested parties and counsel before hearing, and the reports may be received in evidence if no objection is made and, if objection is made, may be received in evidence; provided the person or persons responsible for the report are available for cross-examination as to any matter that has been investigated; and provided further that the court shall define, in accordance with section 571-46.4, the requirements to be a court-appointed child custody evaluator, the standards of practice, ethics, policies, and procedures required of court-appointed child custody evaluators in the performance of their duties for all courts, and the powers of the courts over child custody evaluators to effectuate the best interests of a child in a contested custody dispute pursuant to this section.  Where there is no child custody evaluator available that meets the requirements and standards, or any child custody evaluator to serve indigent parties, the court may appoint a person otherwise willing and available in accordance with section 571-46.4;

     (5)  The court may hear the testimony of any person or expert, produced by any party or upon the court's own motion, whose skill, insight, knowledge, or experience is such that the person's or expert's testimony is relevant to a just and reasonable determination of what is for the best physical, mental, moral, and spiritual well-being of the child whose custody is at issue;

     (6)  Any custody award shall be subject to modification or change whenever the best interests of the child require or justify the modification or change and, wherever practicable, the same person who made the original order shall hear the motion or petition for modification of the prior award;

     (7)  Reasonable visitation rights shall be awarded to parents, grandparents, siblings, and any person interested in the welfare of the child in the discretion of the court, unless it is shown that rights of visitation are detrimental to the best interests of the child;

     (8)  The court may appoint a guardian ad litem to represent the interests of the child and may assess the reasonable fees and expenses of the guardian ad litem as costs of the action, payable in whole or in part by either or both parties as the circumstances may justify;

     (9)  In every proceeding where there is at issue a dispute as to the custody of a child, a determination by the court that family violence has been committed by a parent raises a rebuttable presumption that it is detrimental to the child and not in the best interest of the child to be placed in sole custody, joint legal custody, or joint physical custody with the perpetrator of family violence.  In addition to other factors that a court shall consider in a proceeding in which the custody of a child or visitation by a parent is at issue, and in which the court has made a finding of family violence by a parent:

          (A)  The court shall consider as the primary factor the safety and well-being of the child and of the parent who is the victim of family violence;

          (B)  The court shall consider the perpetrator's history of causing physical harm, bodily injury, or assault or causing reasonable fear of physical harm, bodily injury, or assault to another person; and

          (C)  If a parent is absent or relocates because of an act of family violence by the other parent, the absence or relocation shall not be a factor that weighs against the parent in determining custody or visitation;

    (10)  A court may award visitation to a parent who has committed family violence only if the court finds that adequate provision can be made for the physical safety and psychological well-being of the child and for the safety of the parent who is a victim of family violence;

    (11)  In a visitation order, a court may:

          (A)  Order an exchange of a child to occur in a protected setting;

          (B)  Order visitation supervised by another person or agency;

          (C)  Order the perpetrator of family violence to attend and complete, to the satisfaction of the court, a program of intervention for perpetrators or other designated counseling as a condition of the visitation;

          (D)  Order the perpetrator of family violence to abstain from possession or consumption of alcohol or controlled substances during the visitation and for twenty-four hours preceding the visitation;

          (E)  Order the perpetrator of family violence to pay a fee to defray the costs of supervised visitation;

          (F)  Prohibit overnight visitation;

          (G)  Require a bond from the perpetrator of family violence for the return and safety of the child.  In determining the amount of the bond, the court shall consider the financial circumstances of the perpetrator of family violence;

          (H)  Impose any other condition that is deemed necessary to provide for the safety of the child, the victim of family violence, or other family or household member; and

          (I)  Order the address of the child and the victim to be kept confidential;

    (12)  The court may refer but shall not order an adult who is a victim of family violence to attend, either individually or with the perpetrator of the family violence, counseling relating to the victim's status or behavior as a victim as a condition of receiving custody of a child or as a condition of visitation;

    (13)  If a court allows a family or household member to supervise visitation, the court shall establish conditions to be followed during visitation;

    (14)  A supervised visitation center shall provide a secure setting and specialized procedures for supervised visitation and the transfer of children for visitation and supervision by a person trained in security and the avoidance of family violence;

    (15)  The court may include in visitation awarded pursuant to this section visitation by electronic communication provided that the court shall additionally consider the potential for abuse or misuse of the electronic communication, including the equipment used for the communication, by the person seeking visitation or by persons who may be present during the visitation or have access to the communication or equipment; whether the person seeking visitation has previously violated a temporary restraining order or protective order; and whether adequate provision can be made for the physical safety and psychological well-being of the child and for the safety of the custodial parent;

    (16)  The court may set conditions for visitation by electronic communication under paragraph (15), including visitation supervised by another person or occurring in a protected setting.  Visitation by electronic communication shall not be used to:

          (A)  Replace or substitute an award of custody or physical visitation except where:

               (i)  Circumstances exist that make a parent seeking visitation unable to participate in physical visitation, including military deployment; or

              (ii)  Physical visitation may subject the child to physical or extreme psychological harm; or

          (B)  Justify or support the relocation of a custodial parent; and

    (17)  Notwithstanding any provision to the contrary, no natural parent shall be granted custody of or visitation with a child if the natural parent has been convicted in a court of competent jurisdiction in any state of rape or sexual assault and the child was conceived as a result of that offense; provided that:

          (A)  A denial of custody or visitation under this paragraph shall not affect the obligation of the convicted natural parent to support the child;

          (B)  The court may order the convicted natural parent to pay child support;

          (C)  This paragraph shall not apply if subsequent to the date of conviction, the convicted natural parent and custodial natural parent cohabitate and establish a mutual custodial environment for the child; and

          (D)  A custodial natural parent may petition the court to grant the convicted natural parent custody and visitation denied pursuant to this paragraph, and upon such petition the court may grant custody and visitation to the convicted natural parent where it is in the best interest of the child."

PART V

     SECTION 15.  The legislature finds that economic abuse is pervasive and destabilizes survivors and children.  Existing law lacks adequate safeguards against financial coercion during separation and custody disputes.

     The purpose of this part is to define economic abuse, strengthen automatic restraining orders, impose liability on financial institutions that enable abuse, and treat economic abuse as a factor in custody determinations.

     SECTION 16.  Chapter 412, Hawaii Revised Statutes, is amended by adding a new section to article 1 to be appropriately designated and to read as follows:

     "§412:1-     Protection against financial institution participation in economic abuse.  (a)  It shall be unlawful for any financial institution to:

     (1)  Close, freeze, restrict, or alter an account based on unilateral requests from a spouse or partner;

     (2)  Remove a customer's name from a joint account without consent;

     (3)  Modify online access, passwords, or security settings without verification;

     (4)  Rely on information provided by an abusing party;

     (5)  Shut down accounts as retaliation for disclosures of domestic abuse; or

     (6)  Refuse service or deny reinstatement when coercive control is alleged.

     (b)  If an account is improperly altered, closed, or restricted, the institution shall:

     (1)  Restore the account to active status within five business days;

     (2)  Restore all prior features;

     (3)  Remove adverse credit reporting;

     (4)  Waive penalties or fees; and

     (5)  Provide written confirmation of reinstatement.

     (c)  Victims may sue a financial institution alleged to have committed a violation under this section for:

     (1)  Actual damages;

     (2)  Statutory damages ($2,500 per violation);

     (3)  Attorney's fees;

     (4)  Punitive damages in cases of wilful misconduct; and

     (5)  Injunctive relief.

     (d)  The department of commerce and consumer affairs may impose administrative fines of up to $10,000 per violation of this section.

     SECTION 17.  Chapter 580, Hawaii Revised Statutes, is amended by adding a new section to be appropriately designated and to read as follows:

     "§580-     Automatic restraining order.  (a)  Upon filing of a divorce, separation, or custody action, both parties shall be immediately restrained from:

     (1)  Closing, restricting, or modifying access to accounts;

     (2)  Withdrawing funds other than for ordinary living expenses;

     (3)  Creating new debt secured by marital assets;

     (4)  Changing passwords or online banking access;

     (5)  Interfering with direct deposit;

     (6)  Altering insurance or beneficiary designations;

     (7)  Removing names from accounts;

     (8)  Unilaterally capturing or withholding rental income or other recurring income historically used for household or child support, except for ordinary living expenses or by court order; and

     (9)  Taking any action that destabilizes the victim or child.

     (b)  Any violation of this section shall result in:

     (1)  Immediate restitution;

     (2)  Fee shifting;

     (3)  Potential adverse property division;

     (4)  Contempt findings; or

     (5)  Sanctions."

     SECTION 18.  Chapter 586, Hawaii Revised Statutes, is amended by adding five new sections to be appropriately designated and to read as follows:

     "§586-     Economic abuse.  (a)  Upon sworn allegations of economic abuse, the court shall schedule a hearing within seven to fourteen days.

     (b)  The court may issue ex parte financial freeze orders to:

     (1)  Prevent asset dissipation;

     (2)  Prevent unauthorized withdrawals;

     (3)  Ensure access to essentials; or

     (4)  Maintain the status quo.

     §586-     Forensic accounting authority.  Courts may:

     (1)  Appoint forensic accountants;

     (2)  Order expedited financial disclosures;

     (3)  Subpoena records; and

     (4)  Charge forensic costs to the abusing party.

     §586-     Emergency economic abuse hearings.  Upon sworn allegations of economic abuse, the court shall schedule a hearing within fourteen days and may issue ex parte financial freeze orders to prevent asset dissipation and ensure access to essentials.

     §586-     Economic abuse as a factor in custody determinations.  Economic abuse shall constitute domestic abuse under section 571-46 and shall be a negative factor that weighs against awarding custody, unsupervised visitation, and joint decision-making.

     §586-     Penalties for assisting in economic abuse; mandatory training.  (a)  Attorneys who knowingly assist in economic abuse, including through concealed asset transfers or abusive financial tactics, shall be subject to fee shifting, contempt, sanctions, disqualification, and referral to the office of disciplinary counsel.

     (b)  Mandatory training for judges, guardians ad litem, custody evaluators, and court-appointed professionals shall include identification of economic abuse, financial trauma, and forensic indicators."

     SECTION 19.  Section 586-1, Hawaii Revised Statutes, is amended by adding a new definition to be appropriately inserted and to read as follows:

     ""Economic abuse" means a pattern of behavior, or a single severe incident, that controls, obstructs, restricts, or sabotages a person's access to financial resources, economic stability, property, employment, credit, or ability to meet basic needs.  "Economic abuse" includes:

     (1)  Financial control and deprivation;

     (2)  Financial sabotage;

     (3)  Misuse of financial institutions;

     (4)  Economic threats;

     (5)  Coerced financial dependence;

     (6)  Economic abuse affecting children; and

     (7)  Litigation-related economic abuse."

PART VI

     SECTION 20.  The legislature finds that neurodivergent children and those falsely labeled as such face heightened risk of harm and discrimination.  Disability or diagnosis must never justify abuse or be weaponized in custody disputes.

     The purpose of this part is to prohibit misuse of disability, ban diagnosis shopping, require trauma-informed evaluations, and protect protective parents from retaliation.

     SECTION 21.  Chapter 587A, Hawaii Revised Statutes, is amended by adding eight new sections to be appropriately designated and to read as follows:

     "§587A-     Protective advocacy.  A parent's actions to seek accommodations, therapy, support, trauma-informed services, or evaluations that serve the best interest of the child shall not be treated as obstruction, alienation, or instability.

     §587A-     Disability or neurodivergence non-justification.  (a)  No child's disability, neurodivergence, developmental differences, mental health diagnosis, or trauma-related behavior, actual or alleged, shall be used as justification or excuse for:

     (1)  Physical force or restraint;

     (2)  Seclusion, isolation, or confinement;

     (3)  Humiliating or degrading treatment;

     (4)  Emotional or psychological abuse;

     (5)  Threats or intimidation;

     (6)  Coercive control;

     (7)_ Excessive or punitive discipline; or

     (8)  Withholding comfort, support, therapy, or safety.

     (b)  No adult's disability or neurodivergence, actual or alleged, shall be used to:

     (1)  Discredit abuse reports;

     (2)  Assume lack of parental fitness without evidence;

     (3)  Remove custody; or

     (4)  Restrict decision-making without individualized evaluation.

     (c) Trauma-related behaviors shall not be used as evidence of parental alienation, manipulation, or coaching.

     §587A-     Removal and custody protections.  (a)  A child shall not be removed from a protective parent, nor shall visitation be restricted, based solely or primarily on:

     (1)  Disability, neurodivergence, trauma symptoms, or developmental differences;

     (2)  Sensory overload, shutdowns, meltdowns, or communication challenges;

     (3)  Normal trauma reactions to unsafe environments;

     (4)  A parent's advocacy for diagnoses, supports, accommodations, or therapies;

     (5)  Delays in diagnosis due to system obstacles;

     (6)  A child's refusal to visit an abusive parent;

     (7)  A child's discomfort with a particular evaluator or procedure.

     §587A-     Prohibited court practices.  (a)  Courts shall not:

     (1)  Rely on compliance models requiring neurodivergent children to behave neurotypically;

     (2)  Penalize parents for seeking appropriate evaluations or support;

     (3)  Admit or rely on pseudoscientific theories linking disability to parental unfitness;

     (4)  Order reunification therapy against a neurodivergent child's will;

     (5)  Order therapies prioritizing compliance over emotional safety;

     (6)  Dismiss or minimize the child's reports of abuse due to communication differences; or

     (7)  Misinterpret avoidance, shutdowns, or flat affect as lack of credibility.

     §587A-     Training requirements.  (a)  The following individuals shall receive training pursuant to subsection (b):

     (1)  Family court judges;

     (2)  Guardians ad litem;

     (3)  Custody evaluators;

     (4)  Child welfare services workers;

     (5)  Law enforcement officers; and

     (6)  Court-affiliated therapists.

     (b)  The individuals listed in subsection (a) shall receive the following training:

     (1)  Neurodivergence and disability;

     (2)  Trauma-informed practice;

     (3)  Sensory processing differences;

     (4)  Communication differences;

     (5)  Emotional and developmental needs;

     (6)  Diagnosis shopping;

     (7)  Disability-based discrimination;

     (8)  How abusers weaponize diagnoses; and

     (9)  How to evaluate neurodivergent children safely and ethically.

     §587A-     Evaluation standards.  (a)  Any court-ordered evaluation shall be:

     (1)  Developmentally appropriate;

     (2)  Disability-informed;

     (3)  Trauma-informed; and

     (4)  Sensory-informed.

     (b)  Evaluators shall:

     (1)  Allow breaks, sensory regulation, and communication supports;

     (2)  Avoid coercing or intimidating the child;

     (3)  Avoid rapid or speculative diagnosis;

     (4)  Recognize trauma-related behaviors;

     (5)  Not interpret fear-based reactions as deception; and

     (6)  Understand masking, shutdowns, or selective mutism.

     (c)  Evaluations obtained through diagnosis shopping shall be inadmissible.

     §587A-     Protective parent provision.  (a)  A parent shall not be penalized for:

     (1)  Securing evaluations;

     (2)  Requesting school or medical accommodations;

     (3)  Advocating for individualized education programs or 504 plans;

     (4)  Disagreeing with assessments based on diagnosis shopping;

     (5)  Respecting a child's communication, sensory, or emotional needs; and

     (6)  Refusing to force visitation when the child is distressed.

     §587A-     Remedies and sanctions.  Courts may:

     (1)  Strike reports created as the result of diagnosis shopping;

     (2)  Sanction attorneys;

     (3)  Disqualify evaluators;

     (4)  Order costs and fees to the protective parent;

     (5)  Bar abusive parents from controlling medical decisions; and

     (6)  Restrict access to the child if disability-based abuse occurs.

     SECTION 22.  Section 587A-4, Hawaii Revised Statutes, is amended by adding a new definition to be appropriately inserted and to read as follows:

     ""Diagnosis shopping" has the same meaning as in section 571-2.

     "Disability-based abuse" or "neurodivergence-based abuse" means any conduct that uses disability, real or alleged, as a basis to harm, restrain, control, humiliate, punish, or discredit a child or protective parent, including but not limited to:

     (1)  Physical force or restraint justified as necessary due to disability;

     (2)  Humiliation, punishment, or emotional abuse targeted at disability-related behaviors;

     (3)  Dismissal of abuse allegations because the child is or is alleged to be neurodivergent;

     (4)  Treating sensory overwhelm, shutdowns, or meltdowns as misbehavior warranting force;

     (5)  Denying or withholding accommodations;

     (6)  Coercing therapies to enforce compliance over wellbeing; or

     (7)  Pathologizing normal trauma responses.

     "Neurodivergence" includes autism, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, learning disabilities, sensory processing differences, trauma-based developmental impacts, communication differences, intellectual disabilities, and any other neurological or developmental variation."

PART VII

     SECTION 23.  The legislature finds that reproductive autonomy is a fundamental right under the Hawaii State Constitution.  Abusers weaponize reproductive history, including abortion, miscarriage, infertility treatment, contraception, and pregnancy outcomes, during family court proceedings to shame, intimidate, and discredit parents.  Such practices constitute coercive control and litigation abuse and have no legitimate relevance to parental fitness.

     The purpose of this part is to prohibit the introduction of reproductive history in custody disputes, impose sanctions for violations, and provide remedies for affected parties.

     SECTION 24.  Chapter 571, Hawaii Revised Statutes, is amended by adding a new part to be appropriately designated and to read as follows:

"Part    .  reproductive history

     §571-     Definition.  As used in this part, "reproductive history" includes:

     (1)  Abortion or abortion care;

     (2)  Miscarriage or stillbirth;

     (3)  Infertility or fertility treatment;

     (4)  Contraception use or nonuse;

     (5)  Pregnancy outcomes;

     (6)  Prenatal care decisions;

     (7)  Reproductive health diagnoses; and

     (8)  Sexual or reproductive health care.

     §571-     Reproductive history; inadmissible in family court.  (a)  In any proceeding under this chapter, chapter 580 or 586, or related family court jurisdiction, a party's reproductive history shall be inadmissible, irrelevant, and prohibited from consideration in determining:

     (1)  Custody;

     (2)  Visitation;

     (3)  Parental fitness;

     (4)  Credibility;

     (5)  Moral character; and

     (6)  Best interests of the child.

     (b)  This section shall apply regardless of:

     (1)  The timing of the reproductive event;

     (2)  The number of events;

     (3)  Religious or moral objections raised by another party; or

     (4)  Whether the reproductive decision occurred before or after the child's birth.

     §571-     Reproductive history as litigation abuse.  (a)  Introducing, threatening to introduce, or referencing reproductive history shall constitute litigation abuse and coercive control for the purpose of shaming, discrediting, intimidating, coercing, or influencing custody or other court outcomes.

     (b)  Such conduct shall be treated as domestic abuse for purposes of:

     (1)  Protective orders;

     (2)  Custody determinations; and

     (3)  Attorney sanctions.

     §571-     Attorney prohibitions and sanctions.  (a)  No attorney shall:

     (1)  Introduce evidence of reproductive history;

     (2)  Reference abortion, miscarriage, or reproductive healthcare in pleadings;

     (3)  Suggest reproductive decisions indicate unfitness;

     (4)  Threaten disclosure of reproductive history.

     (b)  Violation shall result in:

     (1)  Immediate exclusion of evidence;

     (2)  Fee shifting;

     (3)  Monetary sanctions;

     (4)  Referral to the office of disciplinary counsel;

     (5)  Potential disqualification.

     §571-     Judicial duties.  (a)  Judges shall:

     (1)  Strike any filing referencing reproductive history;

     (2)  Issue curative instructions where such references are made;

     (3)  Make written findings when sanctions are imposed; and

     (4)  Ensure that custody determinations are based on safety, caregiving capacity, and child well-being only.

     (b)  Failure to comply with this section shall constitute reversible error.

     §571-     Private right of action; application; continuing violations; revival of claims.  (a)  A person harmed by a violation of this part may bring a civil action for one or more of the following remedies:

     (1)  Statutory damages of $10,000 per violation;

     (2)  Actual damages;

     (3)  Declaratory relief;

     (4)  Injunctive relief;

     (5)  Record sealing, record expungement, vacatur, or modification of custody or visitation orders; and

     (6)  Reasonable attorney's fees and costs.

     (b)  This part applies to all family court proceedings pending on or after the effective date of this Act, regardless of when the underlying reproductive event or challenged conduct occurred.

     (c)  Any filing, testimony, pleading, evaluation, order, or court record that references or relies upon reproductive history in violation of this part shall constitute a continuing violation for as long as such material remains in the court record, is relied upon, or produces legal, custodial, reputational, or psychological effect.

     (d)  A person may seek declaratory or injunctive relief under this section regardless of when the violation occurred.

     (e)  Notwithstanding any other law to the contrary, a civil action seeking damages under subsection (a)(1) or (2) based on the introduction, use, or threatened use of reproductive history may be commenced within two years of the effective date of this Act, regardless of when the conduct occurred; provided that:

     (1)  The conduct resulted in loss or restriction of custody, visitation, parental decision-making authority, or parental credibility;

     (2)  The conduct constituted coercive control, litigation abuse, or a violation of constitutional privacy interests; or

     (3)  The harm resulting from such conduct was not fully remedied before the effective date of this Act.

     (f)  Nothing in this section shall be construed to limit damages, sanctions, or other relief for violations or continuing violations occurring on or after the effective date of this Act."

PART VIII

     SECTION 25.  The legislature finds that the department of human services' child welfare services branch has repeatedly failed to protect children from harm and has retraumatized protective parents through coercive practices and inadequate assessments.  Independent oversight and trauma-informed reforms are urgently needed.

     The purpose of this part is to mandate audits of the child welfare services branch's decisions, prohibit coerced protective action, and establish a child welfare ombudsman within the office of the ombudsman to investigate complaints and recommend systemic improvements.

     SECTION 26.  Chapter 96, Hawaii Revised Statutes, is amended by adding a new section to be appropriately designated and to read as follows:

     "§96-     Child welfare ombudsman.  (a)  There is established within the office of the ombudsman a designated child welfare ombudsman, appointed by the ombudsman, to specialize in complaints, investigations, and systemic review relating to child welfare services.

     (b)  The child welfare ombudsman shall operate independently of the department of human services' child welfare services branch.

     (c)  The child welfare ombudsman shall:

     (1)  Receive and investigate complaints from parents, caregivers, advocates, attorneys, mandated reporters, and service providers;

     (2)  Investigate allegations of coerced protective action, survivor-blaming practices, or improper closure correspondence;

     (3)  Independently review adverse outcomes and make systemic recommendations;

     (4)  Review individual cases and systemic practices for compliance with law and policy;

     (5)  Access child welfare services records and data as authorized under this chapter, notwithstanding confidentiality provisions, subject to the safeguards of this chapter;

     (6)  Issue findings and recommendations;

     (7)  Recommend corrective action, policy changes, training changes, or disciplinary review;

     (8)  Refer matters for audit review or legislative oversight when appropriate; and

     (9)  Protect complainants from retaliation.

     (d)  The child welfare ombudsman may issue findings and recommendations but shall not direct individual case outcomes."

     SECTION 27.  Chapter 346, Hawaii Revised Statutes, is amended by adding a new section to part II to be appropriately designated and to read as follows:

     "§346-     Definitions.  (a)  As used in this part:

     "Adverse outcome" means a circumstance in which:

     (1)  Child welfare services closes a case, issues a "no abuse", "not substantiated", or similar finding, or takes no protective action; and

     (2)  The child subsequently experiences:

          (A)  Substantiated abuse or neglect;

          (B)  Serious physical injury;

          (C)  Severe emotional or psychological harm;

          (D)  Sexual abuse;

          (E)  Near-fatal injury; or

          (F)  Death.

     "Adverse outcome" includes harm perpetrated by the originally alleged abusive actor or another household or caregiving individual.

     "Pattern of concern" means three or more cases within a twenty-four-month period in which a child welfare services worker:

     (1)  Minimizes or fails to assess coercive control or emotional abuse;

     (2)  Engages in coerced protective action;

     (3)  Issues improper closure correspondence;

     (4)  Reaches "no abuse" findings followed by later harm or substantiation; or

     (5)  Has one or more cases involving an adverse outcome.

     "Trauma-informed closure communication" means a written or verbal communication that:

     (1)  Does not imply parental wrongdoing absent substantiated evidence;

     (2)  Clearly distinguishes the alleged abusive actor from the protective parent;

     (3)  Affirms that help-seeking does not constitute neglect; and

     (4)  Avoids stigmatizing, punitive, or ambiguous language.

     §346-     Mandatory independent audits.  (a)  The department shall conduct annual independent audits of child welfare services investigations and determinations.

     (b)  Audits shall review, at minimum:

     (1)  Substantiation and non-substantiation patterns, including patterns by unit or worker where permissible;

     (2)  Adverse outcomes following case closure;

     (3)  The adequacy of assessment of coercive control, emotional abuse, and post-separation risk;

     (3)  Supervisory oversight and approval practices;

     (4)  Use of coerced protective action or survivor-blaming practices;

     (5)  Closure correspondence and documentation practices; and

     (6)  Compliance with trauma-informed standards and agency policy.

     (c)  Any adverse outcome shall trigger a mandatory enhanced audit review, including:

     (1)  Review of the original report, safety assessment, and investigatory steps;

     (2)  Evaluation of whether coercive control, non-physical abuse, and post-separation escalation risk were assessed;

     (3)  Review of supervisory oversight and rationale for closure;

     (4)  Identification of any policy, training, or supervision failures contributing to the adverse outcome; and

     (5)  Recommendations for corrective action.

     (d)  Audit results shall be published in anonymized form and transmitted to the legislature and the office of the ombudsman.

     §346-     Pattern of concern; mandatory probation.  (a)  A child welfare services worker identified as exhibiting a pattern of concern shall be placed on mandatory probation.

     (b)  Probation shall include, as appropriate:

     (1)  Enhanced supervision;

     (2)  Mandatory retraining in coercive control, trauma, and child safety assessment;

     (3)  Secondary review of determinations prior to closure;

     (4)  Restrictions on unilateral determinations or case closures; and

     (5)  Documented performance improvement plans.

     (c)  Continued violations or continued unsafe decision‑making during probation shall result in reassignment or termination, and referral for professional discipline when applicable.

     (d)  A finding of a pattern of concern shall be considered in workforce planning, assignment, and supervision decisions to ensure child safety.

     §346-     Prohibition on coerced protective action and survivor-blaming practices.  (a)  A parent shall not be deemed to have failed to protect a child solely or primarily because the parent:

     (1)  Has not left or separated from an abusive partner;

     (2)  Has not filed for or obtained a temporary restraining order or protective order;

     (3)  Has not initiated criminal proceedings;

     (4)  Maintains contact due to economic, housing, safety, cultural, disability, immigration, childcare, or familial constraints; or

     (5)  Reasonably determines, based on lived experience or credible fear, that separation or legal action would escalate danger.

     (b)  No child welfare services branch employee, contractor, or state-funded service provider shall threaten, imply, or state that a child may be removed or placed in foster care solely because a parent has not taken one or more actions listed in subsection (a).

     (c)  Mandatory separation plans, mandatory protective order filing, or mandatory criminal reporting shall be prohibited as conditions of being deemed a protective parent.

     (d)  The child welfare services branch shall engage in:

     (1)  Individualized, trauma-informed safety planning;

     (2)  Assessment of coercive control and post-separation escalation risk;

     (3)  Evaluation of the parent's reasonable efforts within their circumstances; and

     (4)  Voluntary, non-coercive supportive services.

     (e)  A violation of this section shall constitute improper practice and is grounds for:

     (1)  Audit findings;

     (2)  Corrective action, probation, or discipline; and

     (3)  Ombudsman investigation and recommendations.

     §346-     Trauma-informed closure communications; prohibition on correspondence; implying neglect by protective parents.  (a)  When a report or assessment concerns alleged abuse or harm by someone other than the reporting or protective parent, the child welfare services branch shall not send formal correspondence to the protective parent that implies suspicion of neglect, failure to protect, or parental wrongdoing based solely on the parent's role as the protective parent.

     (b)  Prohibited correspondence includes but is not limited to letters, notices, or written communications that:

     (1)  State or imply that the protective parent was under investigation for neglect absent substantiated evidence;

     (2)  Use standardized "case closing", "not confirmed", "not substantiated", or similar language without clearly distinguishing the alleged abusive actor from the protective parent;

     (3)  Suggest that seeking help, reporting abuse, remaining in the relationship, or declining to take specific legal action constitutes neglect or lack of protectiveness; and

     (4)  Reasonably create fear, stigma, or confusion for the protective parent regarding parental status or risk of child removal.

     (c)  Administrative rules, internal policy, or standardized templates shall not be used to justify correspondence that violates this section.

     (d)  Closure communications to protective parents shall:

     (1)  Clearly identify that the concerns related to another individual;

     (2)  Affirm that seeking assistance or reporting concerns does not constitute neglect;

     (3)  Avoid punitive or ambiguous language; and

     (4)  Be written in trauma-informed, plain language.

     (e)  Sending correspondence that violates this section shall constitute improper practice shall be grounds for:

     (1)  Audit findings;

     (2)  Corrective action, probation, or discipline; and

     (3)  Ombudsman investigation and recommendations.

     §346-     Parent and caregiver rights; non-retaliation.  (a)  Parents and caregivers shall have the right to:

     (1)  Trauma-informed communication;

     (2)  Clarity regarding the scope of any assessment or investigation;

     (3)  Assurance that seeking help will not be treated as neglect;

     (4)  Submit relevant evidence and information during an assessment; and

     (5)  Raise concerns to the child welfare ombudsman pursuant to section 96-   .

     (b)  No person shall be retaliated against for contacting the child welfare ombudsman or participating in a child welfare ombudsman investigation.

     §346-     Training and standards.  (a)  Child welfare services branch workers, supervisors, and contractors shall receive mandatory training, which shall be updated regularly and include:

     (1)  Coercive control and post-separation risk;

     (2)  Emotional and psychological abuse;

     (3)  Survivor-blaming prevention and protective parent engagement;

     (4)  Trauma-informed practice and communication;

     (5)  Culturally responsive practice, including Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander families; and

     (6)  Appropriate documentation and closure practices.

     (b)  Training completion shall be tracked and considered in performance evaluation and supervision.

     §346-     Data transparency and reporting.  (a)  The department shall publish anonymized annual data, including:

     (1)  Number of investigations and closures;

     (2)  Substantiation and non-substantiation rates;

     (3)  Number of adverse outcomes, in aggregate and anonymized;

     (4)  Number and category of complaints received by the child welfare ombudsman;

     (5)  Aggregate corrective actions, probation placements, and terminations related to patterns of concern; and

     (6)  Aggregate findings from independent audits.

     (b)  Nothing in this section shall be construed to require publication of personally identifying information."

     SECTION 28.  There is appropriated out of the general revenues of the State of Hawaii the sum of $           or so much thereof as may be necessary for fiscal year 2026-2027 for:

     (1)  Annual independent audits;

     (2)  Training, supervision enhancements, and implementation of trauma-informed standards;

     (3)  Revision of policies and correspondence templates to comply with this part; and

     (4)  Data tracking and reporting systems.

     The sum appropriated shall be expended by the department of human services for the purposes of this Act.

     SECTION 29.  There is appropriated out of the general revenues of the State of Hawaii the sum of $           or so much thereof as may be necessary for fiscal year 2026-2027 for the child welfare ombudsman position.

     The sum appropriated shall be expended by the office of the ombudsman for the purposes of this Act.

PART IX

     SECTION 30.  The legislature finds that severe violence, including attempted homicide, felony assault, strangulation, kidnapping, and sexual assault, is the strongest predictor of future lethal harm to intimate partners and children.  Survivors should not be required to repeatedly relitigate obvious danger.

     The purpose of this part is to require automatic permanent protective orders and custody restrictions when severe violence occurs, ensuring child safety without unnecessary delay.

     SECTION 31.  Chapter 586, Hawaii Revised Statutes, is amended by adding a new part to be appropriately designated and to read as follows:

"Part    .  Severe violent offenses and automatic family court protection

     §586-     Definition.  For the purposes of this part, "severe violent offense" means:

     (1)  Attempted murder in any degree;

     (2)  Assault in the first degree;

     (3)  Assault in the second degree involving substantial bodily injury;

     (4)  Felony strangulation;

     (5)  Kidnapping or unlawful imprisonment in the first degree;

     (6)  Sexual assault in any degree;

     (7)  Domestic violence felonies;

     (8)  Any offense resulting in substantial bodily injury or bodily injury caused by a deadly weapon;

     (9)  Any conduct that constitutes attempted homicide, regardless of charging outcomes; and

    (10)  Any comparable offense committed in another jurisdiction.

     §586-     Automatic permanent protective orders.  (a)  When a court finds by a preponderance of the evidence that a respondent has committed a severe violent offense against:

     (1)  The petitioner;

     (2)  A child of either party;

     (3)  A sibling, parent, grandparent, or other close relative of the petitioner;

     (4)  A romantic partner or ex-partner of the petitioner; or

     (5)  A household member,

the court shall issue a permanent protective order protecting the petitioner and any minor children without the need for further evidence of ongoing danger.

     (b)  The court shall not require:

     (1)  Proof of a continuing threat;

     (2)  Evidence of repeated incidents;

     (3)  A criminal conviction;

     (4)  Police reports; testimony alone shall be sufficient; or

     (5)  Participation in criminal prosecution.

     (c)  The protective order shall be permanent, unless the protected party petitions for dissolution.

     §586-     Automatic restrictions on custody, visitation, and contact.  (a)  If a respondent has committed a severe violent offense, the court shall:

     (1)  Presume that any contact with minor children would endanger their safety;

     (2)  Deny custody, joint custody, legal decision-making authority, and unsupervised visitation;

     (3)  Allow only supervised visitation, unless the protective parent objects;

     (4)  Prohibit overnight visitation entirely; and

     (5)  Permit no contact with the child if the violence suggests homicidal intent or includes strangulation.

     (b)  This presumption shall only be rebuttable by clear and convincing evidence of:

     (1)  Comprehensive rehabilitation;

     (2)  Absence of ongoing risk;

     (3)  Support of the protective parent; and

     (4)  Expert testimony from trained domestic violence specialists.

     §586-     Violent acts against family members; domestic violence toward the parent.  (a)  A severe violent offense committed against any close family member or intimate partner of the protective parent shall be considered an act of domestic violence against the protected parent themselves.

     (b)  This section shall apply even if the parent was not:

     (1)  Present during the violent act;

     (2)  Targeted; or

     (3)  Physically harmed.

     §586-     Violent acts against family; harm to the child.  (a)  Severe violent offenses committed against a family member shall constitute harm and substantial risk of harm to any child associated with the protected party for purposes of section 571‑46 and chapters 350 and 587A.

     (b)  A severe violent offense committed pursuant to this section shall require:

     (1)  Mandatory safety planning;

     (2)  Custody restrictions;

     (3)  Risk assessments; and

     (4)  Child welfare services protective duties.

     §586-     Forced mediation, co-parenting classes, or joint counseling; prohibited.  A survivor protected under this part shall not be ordered to:

     (1)  Participate in mediation;

     (2)  Attend co-parenting classes with the respondent;

     (3)  Engage in joint therapy with the respondent; or

     (4)  Engage in reunification services.

     §586-     Evidence standards.  (a)  Evidence may include:

     (1)  Sworn testimony;

     (2)  Medical records;

     (3)  Photographs;

     (4)  Witness statements;

     (5)  Child welfare services branch reports;

     (6)  Police reports;

     (7)  Restraining orders;

     (8)  Digital evidence; or

     (9)  Historical accounts of violence.

     (b)  Lack of criminal conviction shall not be a basis for denying a permanent protective order.

     §586-     Mandatory judicial explanation.  (a)  If a court fails to grant a permanent protective order or fails to restrict custody under this part, the court shall issue written findings explaining the clear and convincing evidence that justified deviation.

     (b)  A court's failure to issue findings pursuant to this part shall be reversible error.

     §586-     Attorney sanctions.  (a)  Attorneys who attempt the following shall be subject to penalties under subsection (b):

     (1)  Minimize severe violence;

     (2)  Introduce parental-alienation theories to discredit the survivor;

     (3)  Blame the survivor;

     (4)  Argue that violence against a relative is not relevant; or

     (5)  Obscure evidence of homicide-risk factors.

     (b)  Penalties for violations under subsection (a) shall include:

     (1)  Fee shifting;

     (2)  Contempt;

     (3)  Disqualification; and

     (4)  Referral to the office of disciplinary counsel."

PART X

     SECTION 32.  Chapter 571, Hawaii Revised Statutes, is amended by adding a new part to be appropriately designated and to read as follows:

"Part    .  Family violence docket and judicial training

     §571-A  Definitions.  As used in this part, unless the context otherwise requires:

     "Family violence case" means any case involving allegations or evidence of domestic violence, coercive control, child abuse or neglect, emotional or psychological harm, stalking, harassment, economic abuse, litigation abuse, or any conduct posing a risk of harm to a child or adult family member.

     "Family violence docket" means a specialized docket of the family court dedicated to family violence cases.

     "Trained family violence judicial officer" means a judge who has completed all training required under this part and has documented expertise in family violence, trauma, and coercive control.

     §571-B  Family violence docket.  (a)  The family court shall establish a family violence docket to hear all family violence cases.

     (b)  The family violence docket shall be staffed exclusively by trained family violence judicial officers.

     (c)  The chief justice shall ensure that at all times, at least one judge in each judicial circuit is designated to primarily handle family violence cases and possesses advanced training in abuse, trauma, and coercive control.

     (d)  The family violence docket shall employ trauma-informed and culturally responsive practices, including prioritized scheduling for abuse cases.

     §571-C  Judicial assignment and continuity.  (a)  All family violence cases shall be automatically assigned to the family violence docket upon the appearance of allegations in pleadings, testimony, or evidence.

     (b)  No judge lacking the required certification under section 571-D may preside over any portion of a family violence case.

     (c)  Reassignments shall occur only to another trained family-violence judicial officer.

     (d)  Assignment shall occur without the need for motion by either party.

     (e)  Each family violence case shall remain with one assigned judge from initial filing to final resolution, except under extraordinary circumstances.

     (f)  If reassignment is required, the transferring judge shall:

     (1)  Provide a written summary of the case history;

     (2)  Document all prior findings; and

     (3)  Transfer the case only to another trained family violence judicial officer.

     (g)  Arbitrary judicial rotation in family violence cases shall constitute reversible error.

     §571-D  Judicial training and certification.  (a)  Judges assigned to the family violence docket shall complete forty hours of initial training and twenty hours of annual continuing education.

     (b) Training shall include instruction on:

     (1)  Coercive control;

     (2)  Domestic violence dynamics;

     (3)  Child trauma and development;

     (4)  Strangulation and lethality risk;

     (5)  Litigation abuse;

     (6)  Economic abuse;

     (7)  Culturally informed trauma practices;

     (8)  Trauma-informed interviewing of children;

     (9)  Disability and trauma misinterpretation;

    (10)  Parental-alienation pseudoscience;

    (11)  Diagnosis shopping; and

    (12)  Digital and post-separation abuse.

     (c)  Judicial certification shall require demonstrated competency through assessment or observation.

     §571-E  Trauma-informed court processes.  (a)  The family violence docket shall implement trauma-informed practices including:

     (1)  Private and secure waiting areas;

     (2)  Remote testimony options;

     (3)  Minimized continuances;

     (4)  Reduced proximity between survivor and abuser;

     (5)  Child-sensitive scheduling; and

     (6)  Flexible courtroom procedures to reduce re-traumatization.

     (b)  All court staff interacting with survivors and children shall receive trauma-informed training.

     §571-F  Limits on mediation and joint processes.  (a)  No case involving allegations of abuse shall be referred to mediation, joint therapy, reunification services, or co-parenting programs unless:

     (1)  Both parties give voluntary, informed consent; and

     (2)  The trained judge explicitly finds no coercion or safety risk.

     (b)  A protective parent's refusal to participate in joint processes shall not be penalized.

     §571-G  Family violence advisory panel.  (a)  There is established within the family court a family violence advisory panel to provide expert, trauma-informed, culturally grounded, and survivor-centered oversight and guidance for family violence cases.

     (b)  All members of the family violence advisory panel shall be appointed by the governor pursuant to section 26-34.  The family violence advisory panel shall consist of the following five members:

     (1)  One representative from a Hawaii-based nonprofit domestic violence advocacy organization;

     (2)  One representative from a Hawaii-based nonprofit specializing in child and youth trauma;

     (3)  One licensed mental health professional with expertise in trauma and family violence;

     (4)  One indigenous or cultural practitioner with expertise in culturally grounded trauma-informed practice; and

     (5)  One survivor of domestic violence or protective parent with lived experience.

     (c) The family violence advisory panel shall:

     (1)  Assist in designing and updating required judicial training;

     (2)  Review statewide data to identify systemic safety issues;

     (3)  Recommend improvements to trauma-informed court procedures;

     (4)  Identify harmful evaluator practices;

     (5)  Provide culturally grounded insight; and

     (6)  Publish an annual report to the governor, legislature, and judiciary.

     (d)  The family violence advisory panel may request anonymized data, recommend corrective training, and propose best-practice reforms.

     (e)  The survivor-member shall receive confidentiality protections, remote participation options, trauma-informed accommodations.

     (f)  The family violence advisory panel shall serve without compensation but shall be reimbursed for expenses, including travel expenses, necessary for the performance of their duties.

     (g)  The judiciary shall allocate funds for panel operations and compensation.

     §571-H  Prohibition on untrained judges hearing family violence cases.  (a)  No judge shall preside over any family violence case without completing required training.

     (b)  Orders issued in violation of this section shall be voidable and constitute grounds for appeal.

     §571-I  Data collection and oversight.  (a)  The judiciary shall compile and publish annual data including:

     (1)  Number of family violence cases;

     (2)  Assignment compliance;

     (3)  Judicial training status;

     (4)  Child safety outcomes;

     (5)  Use of mediation or reunification orders; and

     (6)  Evaluator and guardian ad litem usage patterns.

     (b)  An annual report of the information in subsection (a) shall be submitted to the legislature no later than twenty days prior to the convening of each regular session."

PART XI

     SECTION 33.  If any provision of this Act, or the application thereof to any person or circumstance, is held invalid, the invalidity does not affect other provisions or applications of the Act that can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this Act are severable.

     SECTION 34.  This Act does not affect rights and duties that matured, penalties that were incurred, and proceedings that were begun before its effective date.

     SECTION 35.  In codifying the new sections added by section 32 of this Act, the revisor of statutes shall substitute appropriate section numbers for the letters used in designating the new sections in this Act.

     SECTION 36.  Statutory material to be repealed is bracketed and stricken.  New statutory material is underscored.

     SECTION 37.  This Act shall take effect on July 1, 2026.

 

INTRODUCED BY:	_____________________________

 

 

Report Title:

Family Safety; Year of Resilience, Safety, and Survivor Justice; Coercive Control; Economic Abuse; Protective Parents Rights; Neurodivergent Child Protections; Reproductive Privacy; Automatic Protective Orders; Child Welfare Ombudsman; Family Violence Docket

 

Description:

Establishes comprehensive reforms to protect children and families from abuse and improve systemic responses.  Part I: Establishes the calendar year 2027 as the Year of Resilience, Safety, and Survivor Justice.  Part II: Modernizes statutory definitions of harm and child abuse.  Part III: Recognizes coercive control as domestic abuse.  Part IV: Reforms Family Court procedures to prioritize child safety and prohibit parental alienation theories.  Part V: Defines economic abuse and strengthens financial protections, including automatic restraining orders, emergency hearings, forensic accounting authority, and liability for financial institutions.  Part VI: Safeguards neurodivergent children and prohibits diagnosis shopping.  Part VII: Protects reproductive privacy in custody proceedings.  Part VIII: Enhances Child Welfare Services Branch accountability through audits and creation of a Child Welfare Ombudsman.  Part IX: Requires automatic protective orders and custody restrictions in cases of severe violence.  Part X: Creates a Family Violence Docket with mandatory judicial training and an advisory panel.

 

 

 

The summary description of legislation appearing on this page is for informational purposes only and is not legislation or evidence of legislative intent.