CJ C.S.H.B. 2227 75(R)BILL ANALYSIS JUVENILE JUSTICE & FAMILY ISSUES C.S.H.B. 2227 4-10-97 Committee Report (Substituted) Introduced BACKGROUND One of the difficult problems facing non-custodial parents is the denial of court-ordered possession or access to their children. It is not uncommon for the custodial parent to deny visitation rights as a powerful weapon against the non-custodial parent. Current law does not currently adequately address this problem. Section 157.168 of the Family Code (the Code) provides that a court may, but is not required to, order make-up visitation time when the custodial parent denies access to a child. Should the court decide not to order make-up time, the parent who has been denied access is without further recourse and is forced to wait until the next visitation period to try again to visit her or his child. PURPOSE H.B. 2227 requires the court to order "make-up" possession or access to compensate for the denial of court-ordered possession or access. RULEMAKING AUTHORITY It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly grant any additional rulemaking authority to a state officer, department, agency or institution. SECTION BY SECTION ANALYSIS SECTION 1. Amends Section 157.168 of the Family Code to require the court to order additional periods of possession or access to a child to compensate for the denial of court-ordered possession or access. It also provides that the additional periods of possession should be equivalent to the periods denied and should occur within one-year after a finding. It also allows the person denied access or possession to decide the time of the additional access or possession. subject to the qualifications for like kind and type outlined earlier in the section. SECTION 2. Effective date: September 1, 1997; makes application of the Act prospective. SECTION 3. Emergency Clause. COMPARISON OF ORIGINAL TO SUBSTITUTE The original bill required the additional periods of access to the child. The substitute returned to the permissive language and added language to clarify that the qualifications in Subsection (a)(1) applied to the time of the additional possession.