[{"_1":2,"_100":-5,"_101":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6232012,"mediaKeyId","3426965-aa24a06502645e7b4ca9195d05f2dab4","parentId",3426965,"title","Senate committee hears wide-ranging testimony on bill to limit court-ordered reunification \"therapy\"","audioSeconds",3557,"startMs",4371000,"endMs",7928000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3426965-aa24a06502645e7b4ca9195d05f2dab4&start=4371&end=7928","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3426965-aa24a06502645e7b4ca9195d05f2dab4/thumbnail_4371000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6232012/Texas/Senate-committee-hears-wide-ranging-testimony-on-bill-to-limit-court-ordered-reunification-therapy","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6232012-0756cdbbdaeead90235f371d131e4b82/orig.mp4?Expires=1770954961&Signature=MluDU0e2klnnLaE37IYZgd1zPWOAG5fAUbk~iffpyUVlGX4r2--BaDrO0aOBoy21fsUdVil7Pyo1G9y8rmX~n5BsQRJjWQ8nUqmFFVP-oAeahsx4lZl0zG82JsNW3o~uvSPB7-BS2I6~EHm1Kty7D6-jEAd85k6GXcxdzOSygccKtGsBiE99rgBXi3we6TXBhKrYIWYlv48YfN4nuR~B7Kh0-KoLRyCzKq0cX~VPD-ggObgYLQSvPVagRf4IKc0NJeMCIvVDSapbgdLdUYJmQUtNq237hHB1~ntnu158~uqfrJvNE8KaV5yhSbJ40ls476WY0dmjKmAodp9mD33KAg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Texas Legislature","date","2025-05-21T00:00:00Z","article","The Texas Senate Committee on Jurisprudence took testimony on House Bill 3783 on May 7, 2025, a bill that would restrict certain kinds of court-ordered counseling often described in testimony as \"reunification therapy.\" Proponents said the bill would prevent coercive, unregulated programs that isolate children from safe parents; opponents warned the bill in its current form could strip courts of necessary tools to address severe parental alienation and psychological harm to children.

Senator Parker, the bill's sponsor, told the committee the legislation does not ban all court-ordered family therapy but would prohibit practices that, supporters said, remove children from their custodial parent or use coercion and unregulated private transporters. \"This bill simply places legal guardrails around this practice, particularly by banning forced separation from the primary custodial parent,\" Parker said while laying out the measure.

Several people who said they had direct experience with intensive reunification interventions testified in favor of the bill. Jeff Diamond, an attorney and adoptive father, described his daughters' experience and called the programs \"a symbolic experimental intervention\" in the words used in materials from some providers. Abigail O'Brien, who said she and her brother were put through a program and subjected to an extended \"no contact\" order, told senators the experience was coercive and traumatic. \"No child should ever be forced to choose between safety and a relationship with the parent,\" O'Brien said.

Advocates for victims of domestic violence supported the bill. Jen Mudge, public policy manager for the Texas Council on Family Violence, said family therapy is effective only when participants can speak honestly and that \"forcing a victim to be in the same room in a counseling session with an abusive partner . . . increases the risk of violence.\"

Opponents included licensed clinicians and some family-law practitioners who said the bill's language is overbroad and would remove a judge's ability to order and allocate payment for ordinary family counseling. Judge Carl Hayes, of Hays County family court, told the committee he is concerned that language on the first page removes a court's authority to order a party to pay for counseling at all, which would prevent judges from requiring therapeutic interventions that a court finds necessary. \"We're throwing the baby out with the bathwater,\" Hayes testified, urging the committee to restore limited authority to order payment and to narrow the bill's scope.

Other witnesses raised technical and equity concerns. Several speakers said the bill's use of the phrase \"credible evidence\" invoked an evidentiary standard that is not defined and could invite litigation about threshold findings in interim hearings; some suggested replacing the bill's family-violence reference point with the Family Code's established definitions (Family Code \u0000261.001). Military advocates told the committee the measure as drafted could create unintended consequences for service members who live out of state or must travel for court-ordered interventions.

Clinicians who provide reunification services said many families they treated benefited from structured programs designed to safely reintegrate an estranged parent, and they warned a blanket ban could harm children who need therapeutic support during reunification. Lisa Wellens, a licensed clinical social worker with decades of court experience, said the practice has often been used to repair relationships after prolonged separation and that courts and clinicians should be allowed to use evidence-based interventions in appropriate cases.

Committee members asked detailed questions about the bill's language, including whether it should explicitly reference statutory abuse definitions, how to preserve judicial discretion while protecting victims, and whether the bill should add a safety carve-out allowing the court to authorize narrowly tailored interventions to protect a child's well-being. Multiple witnesses proposed specific edits: restore the court's limited authority to order payment for counseling; clarify the evidentiary threshold; and reference Family Code 261.001 for the definition of abuse.

Action: The committee took public testimony from scores of witnesses on both sides, heard invited experts and family members, and left the bill pending for further drafting and consideration.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Senate Committee on Jurisprudence May 21, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","Senate committee members heard hours of testimony on House Bill 3783, a proposal to restrict certain court-ordered \"reunification\" or intensive family therapy practices that supporters say can isolate children from custodial parents and opponents say could strip courts of needed tools.","taxTitle","Committee on Jurisprudence, Senate, Legislative, Texas","taxId",16926,"location","Texas","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6232017,"Senate committee considers lowering interest on overdue child support to fixed 5%",2302,388000,2690000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3426965-aa24a06502645e7b4ca9195d05f2dab4&start=388&end=2690","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3426965-aa24a06502645e7b4ca9195d05f2dab4/thumbnail_388000.jpg","/articles/6232017/Texas/Senate-committee-considers-lowering-interest-on-overdue-child-support-to-fixed-5","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6232017-3e406ff279318c66275f92380c964e61/orig.mp4?Expires=1770954961&Signature=iA2XK0LOf7W1UkWAJ~pgRtqYKPJtWUdGe-qyBlO~iYfL~oJLQhcZuH1PEQNxB3JvkVGoh0OH5Ag~zmK4bezYUKLu5LcjgCsyofaZhhQ4ctI7TaweKerBuLT-oIl57ssE6Xj9uZvWy4bpsEANL3rIBBFsFKrya9I9uRUXztQVMeN-Drk-1havjSzjlRhAGNcnvxDZcThRbLvdEGWNkQ9fK2cJ8riuKqb668gVWA0Pfc38BogAvTAefJATf1T8zxgzxQmAIGXLX-iBd00FwiwhREI5QTjIhxQN3NNSlAfxSc8QNVZ0ycJByFqlf3g6JFwtL4FElfmVhrkkWrveNwFU8Q__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Texas Senate Committee on Jurisprudence heard testimony on House Bill 4213 on May 7, 2025, a measure that would change how interest accrues on overdue child support and require the Office of the Attorney General to report on the change.

The bill as filed would replace a variable interest calculation tied to the prime rate with a fixed annual rate of 5 percent for child support arrearages. The committee substitute described to the panel would make that change and require the Office of the Attorney General to include metrics about the effect of the lower interest rate in its biannual child-support enforcement report.

Dean Zaffirini, presenting the bill for the Senate, said the measure was intended to address the difficulty many families face when pursuing overdue support and to improve collection from low-income obligors. \"This high interest rate compounds the debt, making it increasingly difficult for low-income parents to catch up on missed payments,\" the Dean said while explaining the substitute.

Joel Rogers, Associate Deputy Attorney General for Child Support Legal Services, told the committee the attorney general's office has operational concerns with variable and compound interest language. Rogers said the office's new case-management system was designed to handle a simple fixed interest rate and that variable or compound rates would require substantial reprogramming that likely could not be implemented by Jan. 1, 2026. \"Anything that involves variable interest rates or . . . compound interest . . . is going to create a lot of confusion around the state,\" Rogers testified.

Witnesses were split. Terrence Champagne, who said he had testified previously on a companion Senate bill, said empirical work from Wisconsin suggested lowering high arrearage interest rates increased the probability that obligors paid down debt and made current payments. Champagne described Texas's arrears problem in testimony and supported the 5 percent substitute.

Cheryl Johnson, a former Galveston County tax assessor-collector testifying as a citizen, opposed the change. She argued that lowering the rate could \"de-incentivize\" payment and told the committee, \"Please vote down this bill.\" Andrew Ross, an attorney representing clients who collect child support, also opposed reductions from 6 percent, saying in his view high interest rates deter nonpayment and help protect women and children who are judgment creditors.

Judge Carl Hayes, who said he has extensive family-court experience, supported the substitute and cited studies he described from Wisconsin indicating that lowering interest helped increase current collections. Hayes also noted the substitute includes a reporting requirement so the Attorney General must measure whether the change improves collections.

Committee members questioned witnesses about the empirical evidence and whether a 1 percentage-point change would have the behavioral effect seen in Wisconsin when that state cut much higher rates. Rogers reiterated operational constraints and asked the committee to adopt a simple fixed rate if it moved forward.

Action: The committee laid out the committee substitute, took public testimony, then closed testimony and left the bill pending for further consideration.

The bill's supporters argued a lower fixed rate could make it easier for low-income obligors to get out of arrears and pay current support; opponents warned a lower rate could reduce the incentive to pay and said the state should rely on data before changing the structure. The substitute requires biannual reporting by the Attorney General so the legislature will receive metrics on the law's effect if enacted.","The Texas Senate Committee on Jurisprudence heard testimony on House Bill 4213 on May 7, 2025, a bill that would fix the interest rate on overdue child support at 5 percent and require the Office of the Attorney General to report metrics on the change.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6232008,"Committee reviews bill to set qualifications, duties and limits for court-appointed amicus attorneys in parent-child suits",149,236000,385000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3426965-aa24a06502645e7b4ca9195d05f2dab4&start=236&end=385","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3426965-aa24a06502645e7b4ca9195d05f2dab4/thumbnail_236000.jpg","/articles/6232008/Texas/Committee-reviews-bill-to-set-qualifications-duties-and-limits-for-court-appointed-amicus-attorneys-in-parent-child-suits","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6232008-f08255b12fca4d69e057498a856766e5/orig.mp4?Expires=1770954961&Signature=mSEQ3AwRIg5bLj23qN8X4BgP7NVR~LmcMZYmiTIdQlnFHJ6RaZy06ZaQwkyOURfxzJ9dmLK2XDBZeUMYYNh5ggXzMb7wv3-wimeONRx0ZgBNHNW~ZuPOSi7Jwe0Y~HbJXEZ6E195RUNSbAdKQhrT9K6MLsZS99sReMENFI309~hv5CBkKfdBmlgpkUCS~yKTclu9dc5LZT0ouQo9KhwNCPuuRRJNTuq57dBaBdWtAQ1Fm5nR7pDV6ebmZHLBolBBeUdkV4GfFEKyrDG3OoriUXjzrzuu5fWQ3zl-0tH2ihZ8QEcWY~jZGjZcBhpT65gCxtIvDpiJiOHBG2p6K3y5Jg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Senate Committee on Jurisprudence considered House Bill 2530 on May 7, 2025, a measure that would establish procedural safeguards, minimum qualifications and limits for court-appointed amicus attorneys in suits affecting the parent-child relationship.

The Dean of the Senate explained that under current law a court may appoint an amicus attorney without minimum qualification criteria. The bill would require a court to appoint an amicus attorney only after notice and hearing or by agreement of the parties; require the court to consider the parties'ability to pay; set minimum qualifications for amicus attorneys; permit some flexibility in counties under 500,000 residents when a trained amicus is not available; clarify duties and limits on amicus conduct (for example, barring private ex parte communications and limiting testimony in most cases); and set procedures for removal and for addressing conflicts of interest.

The Dean said the committee substitute was requested by the County and District Clerks Association and would require that any birth certificate or other proof of parentage be filed separately to preserve confidentiality (this change is in a different bill but noted during the hearing as part of related parentage measures). Carlos Salinas, a board-certified family lawyer and member of the Texas Family Law Foundation, registered his organization's support and answered questions from the committee.

Action: The committee opened public testimony, received the registered witness, closed testimony and left the bill pending.

Supporters said the measure would professionalize appointments, protect children and families by ensuring qualified appointees, and preserve due process by requiring notice and hearing. The committee will consider the bill further as staff and stakeholders finalize the committee substitute text.","House Bill 2530 would create procedural safeguards and minimum qualifications for appointing amicus attorneys in suits affecting the parent'child relationship, require notice and hearing before appointment in most cases, and clarify powers, duties and removal procedures. The committee opened and closed public testimony and left the bill pending.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Senate committee hears wide-ranging testimony on bill to limit court-ordered reunification "therapy"

Senate committee considers lowering interest on overdue child support to fixed 5%

Committee reviews bill to set qualifications, duties and limits for court-appointed amicus attorneys in parent-child suits