Child custody: visitation.
Summary
Existing child custody law requires the Judicial Council to develop standards for supervised visitation providers in accordance with specified guidelines. This bill would require any standards for supervised visitation providers adopted by the Judicial Council to conform to the provisions of the bill. The bill would require supervised visitation providers to be professional providers or nonprofessional providers, as specified. The bill would require the court, in any case in which it has determined there is domestic violence or child abuse or neglect, as specified, and it determines that supervision is necessary, to consider whether to use a professional or nonprofessional provider based upon the child's best interest. The bill would also require professional providers to receive 24 hours of training in certain subjects. The bill would require providers of supervised visitation to advise the parties of certain legal rights, report suspected child abuse to the appropriate agency, and to suspend or terminate visitation in certain cases in accordance with specified procedures.
Bill status
signed
all 5 stages cleared
Introduction
Feb 2012
Committee Review
Aug 2012
Assembly Passage
May 2012
Senate Passage
Aug 2012
Signed into Law
Sep 2012
Introduced Feb 14, 2012
Signed Sep 28, 2012
Floor votes · Senate Aug 23, 2012 · Assembly May 29, 2012
How they voted
21–9
Passed · 5 other
Total votes 35
Aug 23, 2012
D
Democratic23
91% Yea
R
Republican12
75% Nay
Vote distribution
All Yea
All Nay
Mixed
No data
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
33
Key actions
10
Committee
11
Amendments
3
Sep 28, 2012
Signed into law
Approved by the Governor.
legislature
Aug 28, 2012
Lower · Passed
Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 59. Noes 19. Page 6409.).
lower
Aug 24, 2012
Introduced
In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending. May be considered on or after August 28 pursuant to Assembly Rule 77.
lower
Aug 23, 2012
Senate · Passed
Senate Vote: pass (21-9-5)
senate
Aug 6, 2012
Upper · Passed
From committee: Be placed on second reading file pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8.
upper
Aug 6, 2012
Upper · Passed
From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 3. Noes 1.) (July 3).
upper
Jun 25, 2012
Upper · Passed
In committee: Set, first hearing. Hearing canceled at the request of author.
upper
Jun 7, 2012
Committee
Referred to Com. on JUD.
upper
May 29, 2012
Assembly · Passed
Assembly Vote: pass (48-19-5)
assembly
May 16, 2012
Lower · Passed
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 14. Noes 1.) (May 16).
lower
May 14, 2012
Committee
Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
lower
May 1, 2012
Committee
Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
lower
Apr 26, 2012
Lower · Passed
From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 8. Noes 2.) (April 24).
lower
Apr 19, 2012
Committee
Re-referred to Com. on JUD.
lower
Apr 9, 2012
Committee
Re-referred to Com. on JUD.
lower
Mar 29, 2012
Committee
Referred to Com. on JUD.
lower
Feb 15, 2012
Lower · Passed
From printer. May be heard in committee March 16.
lower
1 primary · 0 co-sponsors
Sponsors
Role
Legislator
Party
State
District
P
FM
Fiona Ma
DDemocratic
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about AB 1674
Scope: CA
Hi! I can help you understand AB 1674. What would you like to know?
Try one of these
i
Maddy answers using official bill text and legislative records. Always verify before sharing.
Sources cited inline