Amends TCA Title 36 and Title 37.

Generally under the present law provisions governing child custody, there is neither a preference nor a presumption for or against joint legal custody, joint physical custody, or sole custody, and the court has discretion to order a custody arrangement that is in the best interest of the child. Unless the court finds by clear and convincing evidence to the contrary, there is a presumption that joint custody is in the best interest of a minor child where the parents have agreed to joint custody or so agree in open court at a hearing for the purpose of determining the custody of the minor child. For the purpose of assisting the court in making a determination whether an award of joint custody is appropriate, the court may direct that an investigation be conducted. The burden of proof necessary to modify an order of joint custody at a subsequent proceeding is by a preponderance of the evidence. This bill adds that: (1) It is the public policy of the state to maximize the participation of both parents pursuant to present law. Present law provides that in a suit for annulment, divorce, separate maintenance, or in any other proceeding requiring the court to make a custody determination regarding a minor child, the determination must be made on the basis of the best interest of the child. In taking into account the child’s best interest, the court must order a custody arrangement that permits both parents to enjoy the maximum participation possible in the life of the child consistent with the certain factors specified in present law, the location of the residences of the parents, the child’s need for stability, and all other relevant factors; and (2) Unless both parents have agreed to a custody arrangement and parenting plan, orders for custody arrangements must include written findings of fact and conclusions of law to support the basis for the order. Under present law, when a child has been removed from such child's home and is in the care, custody or guardianship of the department of children's services, the department is required to attempt to place the child with a relative for kinship foster care. This bill adds that when a child has been removed from the home of one parent and is in the care, custody, or guardianship of the department, the department must consider and evaluate the child's other natural or adoptive parent, if available, for placement before considering any other relative pursuant to present law. ON APRIL 19, 2021, THE HOUSE ADOPTED AMENDMENT #1 AND PASSED HOUSE BILL 237, AS AMENDED. AMENDMENT #1 removes the public policy statement described above in the bill summary in (1) and adds that a child's other natural or adoptive parent will not be eligible for the kinship foster care program or any payments for kinship foster care under the program. This amendment also adds to the bill and revises the present law provision defining of abandonment for the purposes of terminating the parental or guardian rights of a parent or parents or a guardian or guardians of a child in order to make that child available for adoption. Present law provides that abandonment means, among other things, that a child, as a newborn infant aged 72 hours or less, was voluntarily left at a facility by such infant's mother, the mother failed to visit or seek contact with the infant for a period of 30 days after delivery, and for a period of 30 days after notice was given and no less than 90 days cumulatively, the mother failed to seek contact with the infant through the department or to revoke her voluntary delivery of the infant. This amendment changes the applicable age of the infant from "72 hours or less" to "two weeks or younger."