The Judiciary Committee heard testimony March 25 on two bills relating to child custody laws.

LB423, introduced by Bellevue Sen. Abbie Cornett, would require a presumption that both parents are fit for joint legal and physical custody unless this presumption is rebutted by a preponderance of evidence. The bill also would require the court to set procedures for making decisions regarding the day-to-day care and control of the child.

LB589, introduced by Ewing Sen. Cap Dierks, would stipulate that both parents involved in a divorce have joint legal custody and joint physical custody of their children unless there is a medical or legal reason why this should not occur.

Dierks said the bill would benefit children.

“In many situations, children suffer because they are denied time with a parent,” he said.

Chris Johnson, a Hastings attorney, testified in support of both bills. He said the presumption in favor of joint custody would ease tensions and reduce conflict between parents. Currently, parents enter custody battles with an aggressive mindset.

“They have to fight because they need to win,” he said. “If they don't fight, they lose.”

Joe Piccolo of Nebraskans for Family said he spent $30,000 in legal fees fighting for custody of his son. He said current laws make it easy for one parent to shut the other out of the life of the child.

“Most noncustodial parents don't have the money to fight for their children – and why should we have to?” he asked.

Jeff Bettenhausen of Norfolk said he commutes 550 miles a week in order to be close to his son.

“I've done everything in my power to stay actively involved in my oldest son's life,” he said. “We need to level the playing field.”

Amy Martinez of the Nebraska State Bar Association opposed the bills, saying the presumption of joint custody would make it harder for cases to be judged on a case-by-case basis.

“The presumptions take the place of individual consideration,” she said.

John Slowiaczek, an Omaha divorce attorney, also testified in opposition to the bills. He said it would result in “chaos in the legal system.” To assume that every family divides parenting responsibilities equally would result in more children splitting more time between parents, he said, which is not best for the child.

“Do you want to spend one week in a bed in one home and one week in a bed in another home?” he asked.

John Kinney, also of NSBA, agreed. He said a forced presumption would allow decisions to be made based on parents' emotions, which often have little to do with the best interest of the child.

“Those emotions are real and many of those emotions arise from the pain of divorce,” he said.

Omaha attorney Loren Galvin opposed the bills, saying they are unnecessary because sole custody is rarely awarded. More than half of all custody cases in Douglas County result in joint legal custody, he said. Those that are not settled by attorneys go into a mediation program, which half of the time also result in joint custody, Galvin said.