Talk:List of shared parenting legislation

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Parenting, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.ParentingWikipedia:WikiProject ParentingTemplate:WikiProject ParentingParenting articles

Law Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Michigan

If ANYONE can help with Michigan that would be much appreciated. Thanks to the folks active here.

Jspears00 (talk) 18:24, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Added Michigan HB4691 to the summary table. Martinogk (talk) 01:46, 8 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Summary Table

The summary table seems a bit cumbersome. I'm trying to think of a few ways to improve it. I have two goals:

The independent bills burden of proof clause ("preponderance of the evidence", "clear and convincing evidence", etc.) is rather important and not represented in the table. I'd like to include that somehow
The whole thing is too big. Hard to navigate on a phone and even on desktop hard to seek out the desired information, it should be either broken down or have information reduced.

Possible suggested fixes:

Remove some of the less important categories, such as co-sponsor
Is there a way to compress all rows of the same state into one row inside a table? (I'm not well versed with wiki, this is my first one)
Break table into different tables by bill type (eg. 50/50 presumption and child support bills are each independent tables)

Does anyone have any thoughts?

Brandon.norman (talk) 17:36, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Brandon, Thank you for thinking about this. How about we try these three things:

Remove the column for co-sponsors, as you suggest.
When there is more than one sponsor, only include the first one followed by "et al.".
Combine the two last columns for "executive" and "outcome".

We could instead move and include the information about all sponsors and cosponsors to further down on the page where each bill is described in detail. If only a few people voted against, that would also be interesting to include there. I think such information is very useful and informative for the readers, but it does not all have to be in the table. I think it will be difficult to have one row per state rather than one row per bill. I also prefer to keep the different bill types in the same table. The reader can now sort the table and quickly find all bills by state, by year, by type or by outcome. Martinogk (talk) 11:02, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Kansas

The Senate Judiciary Committee in Kansas just passed SB 157 with 17 co-sponsors. [1] ––Ellmist (talk) 23:43, 31 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Alabama

The Alabama Senate passed SB266 with a vote of 25 in favor and 4 against [2]:

"There shall be a rebuttable presumption that joint custody is in the best interest of the child."
"JOINT CUSTODY. Joint legal custody and joint physical custody."
"JOINT PHYSICAL CUSTODY. Physical custody is shared by the parents in a way that assures the child frequent and substantial contact with each parent."
"Frequent and substantial contact means that the child has equal or approximately equal time with both parents."

--Ellmist (talk) 19:01, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This bill follows SB211 from 2018 [3]. --Ellmist (talk) 20:49, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Other Bills

New York –– 2005 –– A0030 –– [4]
New York –– 2017-2018 –– A6054 –– [5]
New York –– 2017-2018 –– S2267 –– [6]
New York –– 2017-2018 –– S2577 –– [7]

--Ellmist (talk) 00:55, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]