On his final day in office, former Governor Phil Murphy signed S4510/A5761 into law, substantially amending New Jersey’s child custody statute, N.J.S.A. 9:2-4. The amendments took effect immediately and apply to contested child custody and parenting-time matters throughout New Jersey.
The revised statute changes how courts evaluate custody disputes, placing increased emphasis on child safety, a child’s expressed preferences, limits on court-ordered therapy, and cases involving domestic violence or child abuse.
Safety Is Now the Threshold Issue in Custody Decisions
The law rewrites the statute’s public policy section. The longstanding declaration that New Jersey seeks to ensure minor children “frequent and continuing contact with both parents” has been removed. Instead, the statute now provides that the physical and emotional protection and welfare of minor children are paramount.
While the statute recognizes that protecting a child may include continued contact with both parents, it no longer establishes a public policy that such contact must be assured in every case. Shared parental rights and responsibilities remain supported, but only when shared parenting is in the child’s best interests and promotes the child’s protection and welfare.
Most significantly, courts are now directed to address child safety as a threshold issue in custody and parenting-time decisions. In practice, safety concerns must be evaluated before determining schedules, overnights, or access arrangements.
Emphasis on Children’s Preferences and Expanded Custody Findings
The amended statute reinforces that custody and parenting-time determinations must be made on a case-by-case basis and that a child’s expressed preferences should be considered.
Although the legislative findings reference children’s preferences without specifying an age or maturity requirement, other provisions continue to limit consideration of a child’s wishes to situations in which the child is of sufficient age and capacity to form a reasoned preference. Courts will be required to reconcile this distinction as the law is applied.
The statute preserves the principle that both parents have equal rights in custody proceedings and expands the list of factors courts must consider to include:
- Any history of domestic violence or child abuse.
- The safety of the child and the child’s siblings.
- Input or supporting documentation from a state-licensed mental health professional providing private therapy or services to the child, to the extent permitted by professional licensure.
- Evaluations are administered by court-appointed professionals when assessing parental fitness.
When a court enters a custody arrangement that is contrary to a child’s expressed preferences, it must now state on the record both the reasons for the custody decision and the reasons for declining to follow the child’s stated wishes. This requirement increases transparency and creates a clearer appellate record in contested custody cases.
Strict New Limits on Court-Ordered Therapy
The most extensive changes involve court-ordered therapy in contested custody matters. When parents do not agree, a court may now order therapy only if the treatment is scientifically valid and supported by generally accepted proof of effectiveness and therapeutic value.
Therapy may not be ordered without good cause. The statute sets forth a non-exhaustive list of factors courts must consider when determining whether that standard is met, including the child’s needs, parental cooperation, prior interventions, and any history of domestic violence.
Programs such as reunification therapy between a child and an estranged parent may not be ordered unless both parents consent and the court determines the child is of sufficient age. Before ordering therapy under these provisions, the court must conduct a plenary hearing to determine whether the statutory requirements have been satisfied.
When a child is of sufficient age, the court may also consider the child’s experiences in therapy when deciding whether to modify, continue, or terminate treatment.
Restrictions When Domestic Violence or Child Abuse Is Present
The statute now expressly provides that when there is a history of domestic violence or child abuse, the offending party may not be granted increased custody or parenting time for the purpose of improving the relationship between that party and the child.
This prohibition applies even when the stated goal is reconciliation or relationship-building. Given how frequently domestic violence findings arise in family court matters, this change is expected to significantly impact both initial custody determinations and future modification applications.
Required Study of the Law’s Impact
In addition to the custody-related changes, the statute directs the Administrative Office of the Courts, in consultation with the Institute for Families at the Rutgers School of Social Work, to study the impact of these amendments and issue a report evaluating their effects. The report must be released no later than January 2029.
Marlton Child Custody Lawyers at Burnham Douglass Help Families Navigate Custody Changes
If you need assistance with child custody matters or modifications to existing custody or parenting-time agreements, our Marlton child custody lawyers at Burnham Douglass are here to help. Call 856-751-5505 or contact us online to schedule a free consultation. We have offices in Marlton and Northfield, NJ.