1-1  By:  Harris                                           S.B. No. 1594
    1-2        (In the Senate - Filed March 14, 1995; March 22, 1995, read
    1-3  first time and referred to Committee on Jurisprudence;
    1-4  April 11, 1995, reported favorably, as amended, by the following
    1-5  vote:  Yeas 6, Nays 0; April 11, 1995, sent to printer.)
    1-6  COMMITTEE AMENDMENT NO. 1                               By:  Harris
    1-7  Amend SECTION 1 of the bill by striking the sentence beginning on
    1-8  page 1, line 12 (committee printing page 1, line 23), that reads "A
    1-9  party may rebut the presumption by proposing an arrangement other
   1-10  than joint managing conservatorship."
   1-11                         A BILL TO BE ENTITLED
   1-12                                AN ACT
   1-13  relating to the joint managing conservatorship of a child.
   1-14        BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS:
   1-15        SECTION 1.  Subsection (e), Section 14.021, Family Code, is
   1-16  amended to read as follows:
   1-17        (e)  If a written agreement of the parents is not filed with
   1-18  the court, the court may appoint the parents as joint managing
   1-19  conservators of the child in its decree <only> if the trier of fact
   1-20  finds <by a preponderance of the evidence> that the appointment is
   1-21  in the best interest of the child.  It is a rebuttable presumption
   1-22  that the appointment of the parents as joint managing conservators
   1-23  is in the best interest of the child.  A party may rebut the
   1-24  presumption by proposing an arrangement other than joint managing
   1-25  conservatorship.  In determining the best interest of the child,
   1-26  the trier of fact shall consider all of the following factors:
   1-27              (1)  whether the physical, psychological, or emotional
   1-28  needs and development of the child will benefit from the
   1-29  appointment of joint managing conservators;
   1-30              (2)  the ability of the parents to give first priority
   1-31  to the welfare of the child and reach shared decisions in the
   1-32  child's best interest;
   1-33              (3)  whether each parent can encourage and accept a
   1-34  positive relationship between the child and the other parent;
   1-35              (4)  whether both parents participated in child rearing
   1-36  before filing the suit;
   1-37              (5)  the geographical proximity of the homes of the
   1-38  parents;
   1-39              (6)  if the child is 12 years of age or older, any
   1-40  preference of the child for or against the appointment of joint
   1-41  managing conservators; and
   1-42              (7)  any other relevant factor.
   1-43        SECTION 2.  (a)  This Act takes effect September 1, 1995, and
   1-44  applies to a suit affecting the parent-child relationship:
   1-45              (1)  pending on that date; or
   1-46              (2)  filed on or after that date.
   1-47        (b)  The enactment of this Act does not by itself constitute
   1-48  a material and substantial change of circumstances sufficient to
   1-49  warrant modification under Section 14.08 or 14.081, Family Code, of
   1-50  a court order or portion of a decree that provides for the
   1-51  appointment of a conservator or that sets the terms and conditions
   1-52  of conservatorship entered before the effective date of this Act.
   1-53        SECTION 3.  The importance of this legislation and the
   1-54  crowded condition of the calendars in both houses create an
   1-55  emergency and an imperative public necessity that the
   1-56  constitutional rule requiring bills to be read on three several
   1-57  days in each house be suspended, and this rule is hereby suspended.
   1-58                               * * * * *