Signed June 22, 2026. Effective immediately.
Executive takeaway: The Alec and Lydia Act materially changes Arizona decision making and parenting-time practice by placing child safety first where domestic violence has occurred.
In 2024 Alec and Lydia were murdered by their father during unsupervised visitation. The Father then shot and killed himself. There were warning signs. The father had threatened suicide and reported homicidal thoughts. He had even been hospitalized for psychiatric concerns. But he had, nevertheless, been awarded unsupervised visitation.
This is horrific. But it is not an isolated instance. Between 2018 and 2024, 38 children were killed by a parent or guardian arising out of a family separation in Arizona. It has been reported that Arizona leads the nation in per capita child fatalities during separation and custody disputes.
The efforts and resolve of Alec and Lydia’s grieving mother have resulted in the most significant change in Arizona law concerning domestic violence, child custody, and parenting time that we have seen in decades of practice. The new law shifts the focus from parental access to child safety. It is effective immediately and applies to all new parenting plans as well as modifications of existing plans. A brief summary follows.
What this means: Courts must now address domestic violence allegations directly, make written findings, and prioritize the safety and well-being of the child and the domestic violence victim before entering legal decision-making or parenting-time orders.
Public policy and safety priority. ARS 25-403 was extensively modified. Arizona now expressly declares that domestic violence, including child abuse, is contrary to a child’s best interests. In legal decision-making and parenting-time matters, the court must give the highest priority to the personal safety and physical, mental, and emotional well-being of both the child and the domestic violence victim.
Required findings. Before entering an order for legal decision-making or parenting time, the court must resolve any allegation of domestic violence and make specific written findings on the record.
Standard of proof. A domestic violence claim can be established by a preponderance of the evidence, meaning the evidence must show that the claim is more likely true than not. Corroborating exhibits or testimony from another witness are not required.
Mandatory rebuttable presumption. If the court determines that domestic violence by a parent has occurred, there is a mandatory rebuttable presumption that awarding legal decision-making or parenting time to that parent is contrary to the child’s best interests. The presumption can be overcome only by clear and convincing evidence, a higher standard than preponderance of the evidence.
The court shall disregard the fact that the child was not a witness to the domestic violence or did not learn of it. The court shall disregard the wish of a child to have contact with the parent who is restricted by the mandatory presumption.
The court may not grant sole or joint legal decision-making, unsupervised parenting time, or supervised parenting time to a parent restricted by the mandatory presumption. But supervised parenting time may be awarded where the parent attempted, unsuccessfully, to rebut the mandatory presumption but did present a preponderance of the evidence. The court must adopt precautions that prioritize the personal safety and physical, mental, and emotional health of the child and the other parent. A non-exclusive list of precautions is set forth in the new statute.
For the first time, “Coercive Control” is designated as an act of domestic violence and is defined as “a pattern of violent, threatening, coercive or emotionally abusive conduct by one parent against the other without consent or justification including any of the following….” (A lengthy list of conduct is included in the statute). The list includes such things as isolation from friends and family, demeaning, degrading or humiliating words or actions, use of surveillance or tracking technology, threats of violence, or forcing a parent to defend legal claims that are false or frivolous.
From a reading of the text of the new statute, it is apparent that the legislature intended to eliminate or reduce judicial discretion in matters of child safety in the hope that future tragedies can be prevented. Practically, this law changes how courts, lawyers, and parents must approach any case involving domestic violence, child abuse, or credible safety concerns.
If you need help with a family legal matter, contact one of our experienced family law attorneys to assist you.