Proposed Citizen Initiative (Bill Form)

AN ACT
To Reform Family Law Dispute Resolution, Protect Children, and Ensure Equal Treatment of Parents

Sec. 0. Short title.
This Act may be known and cited as “For Our Children and Families.”

Sec. 1. Legislative findings and intent.
The people of the State of Maine find and declare the following.

1. Government failure. Persistent court backlogs, procedural inefficiencies, and structural deficiencies in family law proceedings have caused prolonged instability for children and families, resulting in emotional, developmental, educational, and economic harm.
2. Harmful incentives in adversarial family litigation. The adversarial structure of family law proceedings incentivizes prolonged conflict, escalates hostility, depletes family resources intended for children, and rewards litigation conduct that prolongs disputes rather than resolves them.
3. Protection of the parent-child relationship. Interference with a child’s relationship with a fit parent constitutes psychological harm to the child and undermines the child’s long-term emotional, educational, and developmental wellbeing.
4. Best interest of the child. All family law dispute resolution must adhere strictly to the Best Interest of the Child standard set forth in Title 19-A, section 1653, subsection 3.
5. Unexamined professional incentives and privileges. Family law proceedings uniquely combine emotional vulnerability, information asymmetry, and prolonged litigation timelines, creating conditions in which unexamined professional privileges and financial incentives may distort outcomes to the detriment of children.
6. Premature adversarial framing. Adversarial advocacy frequently precedes neutral fact-finding, allowing allegations and narratives to be framed before any independent assessment of the child’s circumstances occurs.
7. Limits of self-regulation. Professional self-regulation alone has proven insufficient to deter conduct that prolongs family conflict or depletes resources intended for children.
8. Accountability proportional to authority. Attorneys exercise significant authority over family outcomes, access to the courts, and the financial trajectory of family disputes. Accountability proportional to that authority is necessary when discretion is knowingly exercised in a manner that harms children.

Intent. It is the intent of this Act to reorder family law proceedings so that neutral fact-finding and child protection occur before adversarial escalation; to reduce unnecessary litigation; to preserve family resources for children; to ensure equal procedural treatment of parents; to deter economic exploitation within family litigation; to criminalize intentional destruction of the parent-child relationship; to prevent abuse of protective and procedural mechanisms; and to introduce transparency and oversight mechanisms while preserving judicial independence.

Sec. 2. Amendment to duties of Family Law Magistrates.

1. Neutral evaluation enforcement; ministerial filing control. In all family matters involving minor children, no contested or adversarial filing may be accepted for docketing unless the filing certifies that: (A) any required threshold safety screening by the Department of Health and Human Services has occurred; (B) an interim Guardian ad Litem has been automatically appointed when required by this Act; and (C) any mandatory stay on adversarial advocacy imposed by this Act has expired.
2. Seven-day cure period. A party whose filing is rejected under subsection 1 must be provided written notice of the deficiency and afforded seven calendar days to cure the defect.
3. Limitation on contested interim hearings. Except in emergency circumstances involving imminent risk of serious physical harm to a child, no contested interim hearing may occur until the Guardian ad Litem’s Preliminary Investigative Report has been filed.
4. Emergency authority preserved. Nothing in this section limits the authority of the court to issue temporary orders strictly necessary to protect a child from imminent physical harm.

Selected later sections.

• Sec. 12 / §553-A. Intentional parental alienation. A person commits intentional parental alienation if the person knowingly engages in a pattern of conduct resulting in substantial impairment of parenting rights without legitimate safety justification. Prohibited conduct includes false abuse allegations, coercion, repeated disparagement, and misuse of systems. Expert or Guardian ad Litem corroboration is required. A violation is a Class D crime, escalating to Class C. This section does not require child testimony.
• Sec. 12-A / §553-B. Abuse of protective allegation processes. A person commits abuse of protective allegation processes if the person repeatedly or knowingly makes false or unsubstantiated allegations of abuse or domestic violence for the primary purpose of interfering with parenting rights. A pattern may be established through repeated dismissed allegations or findings of lack of credibility. Escalating sanctions include custody modification, fee shifting, and criminal penalties. Good-faith reporting supported by evidence is protected.
• Sec. 13. Civil accountability for attorney participation in intentional parental alienation. A child subjected to alienation may bring a civil action against an attorney who knowingly facilitated such conduct. Proof must be clear and convincing. Remedies include damages, fees, and equitable relief. The limitations period extends twenty years after majority with delayed discovery.
• Sec. 13-A / §354-C. Attorney facilitation of abusive litigation conduct. An attorney commits this offense if the attorney knowingly assists repeated false allegations or procedural abuse after notice. A pattern plus notice is required. Penalties escalate from Class D to Class C. Good-faith advocacy is excluded.
• Sec. 14. Family law transparency dashboard and automatic enforcement triggers. A public dashboard shall publish anonymized data on case duration, filings, fees, and findings. Repeated metrics thresholds automatically trigger judicial review conferences. Data may not be used as evidence in individual cases.
• Sec. 15. Family law advisory oversight and funding incentives. A non-enforcement advisory committee is established. The committee issues public reports and recommendations. Legislative funding may be conditioned on progress metrics.
• Sec. 16. Non-waiver of child protections.
• Sec. 17. Rules and implementation deference. The Judicial Branch may adopt implementing rules consistent with this Act.