BOISE, ID – A new Idaho legislative task force is wading into the complicated and emotional territory of child custody laws with the possibility of making changes.
The Child Custody and Domestic Relations Task Force has met twice since the Legislature adjourned for the year, and co-Chairs Sen. Tammy Nichols, R-Middleton, and Rep. Heather Scott, R-Blanchard, said the group came about because of complaints from constituents.
“Our purpose here is to study how child custody and family laws are being interpreted and applied by Idaho courts,” Nichols said at the first meeting on July 7.
Nichols said the group of lawmakers will look into recommending changes to the state’s laws to “provide courts and citizens with more clarity.”
Scott told the Idaho Capital Sun in a text message that many legislators had been hearing reports of parents losing full custody of their children to co-parents with serious criminal records and some who had been “stuck in the system for several years spending lots of money” to fight for their children “with no end in sight.”
The two meetings have been marked by detailed explanations of current practices from law enforcement, state child welfare staff, and judges who work in the area. The meetings have also been attended by those who feel strongly that they’ve been wronged by the system — in some cases fighting for custody against a parent with more legal resources, or others who didn’t believe the judge spent the time to consider their evidence and perspective before deciding.
Child advocates disagree on whether parental consent law hampers child abuse investigations
The group’s second meeting on July 31 in Hayden, Idaho, prompted discussion over the state’s parental consent law, passed in 2024. Senate Bill 1329 requires parental consent before a “health care service” is provided to minors under 18 in most circumstances.
Scott Coleman, director of Safe Passage Children’s Advocacy Center in Coeur d’Alene, said the law hampered the center’s ability to provide medical treatment to children whose parents may have abused them.
“If we have a parent that’s accused of sexual abuse, we cannot perform a forensic interview, basically just an exploratory interview on that child, without a signature from the parent,” Coleman said. “And if the parent is the perpetrator, that’s a problem.”
Rep. Barbara Ehardt, R-Idaho Falls, a task force member and one of the authors of the bill, argued this wasn’t the case. She said there was an exemption that allows for treatment in an emergency.
“The law absolutely allows for that,” Ehardt said.
Under the bill, treatment may be provided without consent if the provider “reasonably determines that a medical emergency exists” and if the service is necessary “to prevent death or imminent, irreparable physical injury.”
The bill also requires that minors’ health information be released to parents upon request, with an exemption for cases in which the parent is under investigation for a crime against the child and law enforcement requested the information not be shared with that parent. The medical records also would not need to be shared if doing so would violate a court order.
An effort to clarify the law to allow for sexual assault exams without parental consent passed the Idaho Senate this year, but failed to advance in the House before the end of the legislative session, Idaho Reports reported.
Another speaker at the meeting, who has a background in forensic science and working with survivors of abuse, Conrad Woodall, director of operations at the public charter school Kootenai Classical Academy, argued the law was being misinterpreted in regards to sexual assault investigations.
He said that a forensic exam is not a “treatment” and therefore should not fall under the parental consent requirements in the bill.
“So there’s no reason for these organizations to not be conducting forensic exams based on this bill,” he said. “What you get is people in risk management that read something, they get all scary, and then they don’t do what they should be doing.”
Ehardt said there would be another bill brought to clarify the intention of the bill during the 2026 legislative session, which will begin in January.
Lawmakers question judicial oversight in custody proceedings
The legislative panel during its day-long meeting also heard from those in the judiciary and questioned them about the oversight regarding conduct and decisions.
Idaho Judicial Council Executive Director Jeff Brudie, a retired district judge, told lawmakers about the council’s role in investigating and disciplining judges for violations of its Code of Conduct and its role in helping select options for the governor to appoint judges to fill vacancies.
Magistrate judges oversee child custody and family relations cases, Brudie said, and the council does not play a role in selecting those judges. Local jurisdictions around Idaho each have their own magistrate council, which appoints judges in those districts.
The councils may recommend suspension or removal of judges if their conduct in and out of the court are deemed unethical. It may also recommend retirement of judges if a disability would substantially interfere with the performance of duties. These recommendations go to the Idaho Supreme Court.
The council cannot take actions regarding complaints against a particular judge’s ruling — those must be appealed to a higher court.
Kootenai County Magistrate Judge Mayli Walsh said she oversees a number of types of cases, including family law and domestic relations, guardianships and others. The North Idaho county has the third largest number of family law filings out of all 44 counties, she said.
She said that she often encourages parents to use a mediator to resolve issues without a trial, and for parents to create their own parenting plans through the court’s Focus on Children Class.
“We as judges encourage families to make their own decisions on what parenting (should look like),” Walsh said. “… These individuals are often in relationships that are newly fractured, going through divorce, separation, and so they need additional tools.”
Revoking a parents’ rights to their child requires a “high burden” for courts, Walsh said, usually to demonstrate that the child is unsafe due to mental health issues, incarceration or substance abuse.
“The right to parent is fundamental,” she said. “It’s enshrined in the Constitution.”
Ehardt asked Walsh what happens if a judge makes the wrong decision in one of these custody cases.
The judge responded that the parent may ask the judge to reconsider or appeal to district court.
Many parents represent themselves in court, Walsh said. A law passed during this year’s legislative session may have inadvertently removed the right to a public defender for parents facing termination of parental rights, the Sun reported. The change places Idaho among four states that do not guarantee a right to counsel for parents facing termination of parental rights, according to a national child welfare attorney.
Lawmakers eye reforms to improve outcomes for Idaho children and parents
Scott told the Sun that she’s considering changes to state law that may include utilizing mediation more to reduce judges’ workload and lessen costs for parents, and creating policies to ensure children stay out of custody of abusive parents.
The task force is scheduled to meet monthly through October. The group has been taking public input, which on Thursday included some tearful testimony from parents who lost some or all of their rights to see their children, or who have been fighting in court for years and spent thousands of dollars.
During the meeting, Nichols emphasized that the Legislature’s power was limited when it came to the courts.
“We are not here to second-guess decisions of individual judges or undermine the integrity of the court,” she said.
This story first appeared on Idaho Capital Sun.