WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

SF 515

A bill for an act relating to consideration of the educational setting of a minor child in a child custody proceeding.

2025-2026 Regular Session

Courts must consider a child’s educational setting in custody decisions and uphold a presumption of continuity with the prior year’s setting, rebuttable by evidence.

Rereferred to Judiciary.
#childcustody #children #consideration #domesticrelations #education #minors #schools #students
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · SF 515

Summary — SF 515 (child custody: consideration of a minor child’s educational setting)

Status and procedural history
- Introduced: March 5, 2025.
- Senate actions: Committee report favorable; passed the Senate 4/9/2025 (yeas 47, nays 0). Amendment S‑3087 was adopted; S‑3085 was ruled out of order; S‑3092 was filed and withdrawn. Rereferred to Judiciary (5/15/2025).

Purpose
- To require courts to consider and explicitly address a minor child’s “educational setting” when making custody and temporary custody orders, and to establish a presumption favoring continuity in the child’s recent educational setting.

Key provisions
1. Definition added (new subsection in Code §598.1)
- “Educational setting” is defined as the type of educational environment (not a specific school or geographic location). It expressly includes: public school, accredited nonpublic school, and competent or independent private instruction under chapter 299A, and any other method that satisfies compulsory education requirements.

  1. Temporary custody orders (amend §598.10)

    • When parents disagree over a child’s educational setting, the court must consider the educational setting in issuing a temporary custody order.
    • A rebuttable presumption that it is in the child’s best interest to remain in the educational setting in which the child was enrolled during the immediately preceding school year.
    • The presumption may be rebutted only by a preponderance of the evidence.

  2. Joint legal custody and custodial orders (amend §598.41)

    • If joint legal custody is awarded and parents disagree about educational setting, the court must consider and include a provision addressing the child’s educational setting.
    • Same continuity presumption and evidentiary standard as above.
    • All custody orders must specify each parent’s rights and responsibilities related to the child’s educational setting, at minimum addressing:
      • Physical access to the child during the school day;
      • Access to records concerning the child’s health, education, and welfare;
      • Decision‑making authority and when parental consent/authorization is required;
      • Removal of the child from the educational setting during school hours.
    • Limitation adopted by amendment S‑3087: a parent shall not have access to the other parent’s home during the provision of competent or independent private instruction of the child in that home under chapter 299A.
    • Any parent with legal custody must provide a copy of the custody order to the relevant educational setting and the child’s school district.

Who is affected
- Parents in divorce, separation, or custody disputes; children whose custody is at issue; family courts/judges; school districts, individual schools, and private/in-home instructors (homeschool/competent private instruction providers); attorneys and guardians ad litem.

Potential impacts and considerations
- Emphasizes continuity of the child’s educational environment as a factor in custody decisions, likely making school stability a stronger default in disputes.
- Requires courts to spell out educational rights and procedures in orders, which may reduce later disputes but increase the detail required in custody proceedings.
- Limits noncustodial parental access to another parent’s home during in‑home private instruction, strengthening privacy/control for the parent providing instruction.
- Imposes an administrative requirement on custodial parents to provide custody orders to schools/districts.

Evidentiary standard
- The presumption in favor of keeping the child in the prior year’s educational setting can be overcome only by a preponderance of the evidence (i.e., more likely than not that the setting is not in the child’s best interest).

Note about amendments
- S‑3087 (adopted) added the explicit restriction on access to the other parent’s home during in‑home private instruction. S‑3085 was ruled out of order, and S‑3092 (a broader substitute) was filed and withdrawn prior to final Senate passage.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.