The Alec and Lydia Act is Arizona House Bill 2995. It strengthens protections for children in family court when domestic violence is alleged or established. The law is named for Alec and Lydia, two children who were killed by their father during unsupervised parenting time.

June 22, 2026, the day it was signed. The measure included an emergency clause, so there was no waiting period.

After a court finds domestic violence, Arizona law creates a mandatory rebuttable presumption that awarding legal decision-making or parenting time to the parent who committed domestic violence is contrary to the child's best interests. The court must also adopt precautions that prioritize the safety and well-being of the child and the other parent.

Once domestic violence is established, the parent who committed it bears the burden required to overcome the presumption. The victim does not have to prove that the abuse was severe or frequent enough to justify restrictions, and the child's absence or unawareness is irrelevant to the presumption.

Yes. The enacted HB 2995 statute text is available on our site.

Best Law Firm's position is that the Act should govern evidentiary hearings and decisions held after June 22, 2026, even when a case was filed earlier. How that argument applies depends on the posture of the case, the evidence admitted, and the relief requested.

Yes. The Act applies in Arizona legal decision-making and parenting-time matters involving parents and domestic violence; marriage is not required.

It may. Best Law Firm's position is that the Act applies when a qualifying issue is properly before the court after June 22, 2026. A modification, contempt matter, or other proceeding must still satisfy the procedural requirements that apply to that request.

Yes. The Act added coercive control to the family-court definition of domestic violence. It lists 15 examples, including financial control, isolation, stalking or harassment, humiliation, threats, misuse of litigation, immigration-related coercion, and surveillance or tracking used to facilitate abuse. Arizona criminal law also identifies qualifying domestic-violence offenses.

It might have. The Act's definition can reach coercive control and qualifying abuse against a child in either parent's household. A consultation with an Arizona family-law attorney who understands the new statute can help you evaluate the specific conduct and evidence.

Arizona domestic-violence law includes specified criminal offenses when they occur within a qualifying family or household relationship. Child abuse is one of those listed offenses, and the Act expressly includes domestic violence against a minor child living in either parent's household.

It can be. When the conduct meets Arizona's child-abuse and domestic-violence definitions, the child may be the domestic-violence victim and the Act's safety protections can apply.

It may. Arizona's child-abuse statute can apply when a parent or custodian causes or permits a child to be abused. If the court finds that a parent committed domestic violence by permitting the abuse, the presumption applies to that parent.

A domestic-violence claim is established by a preponderance of the evidence, meaning more likely than not. Different burdens apply later if the parent who committed domestic violence tries to overcome the mandatory presumption.

Yes. A police report is not required. The Act says corroboration from exhibits or another person's testimony is not required, so the victim's testimony can be sufficient if the court finds it credible.

Yes, it can. Corroboration is not required, although the court still evaluates credibility and all admissible evidence. A clear timeline and detailed testimony can help the court understand conduct that happened in private.

Potentially. The court must consider other acts of domestic violence that tend to prove coercive control even if those acts predate the last decree, were decided before, or could have been litigated at another time or place. The rules of evidence and the issues before the court still matter.

Before entering legal decision-making or parenting-time orders after a trial or other evidentiary hearing, the court must resolve domestic-violence allegations with specific written findings about the admitted evidence, the presumption, and the precautions selected. Temporary-orders hearings involving a domestic-violence allegation also require written findings consistent with the Act.

They create a reviewable record of what evidence the court accepted, how it applied the presumption, and why it selected particular safeguards. That record can guide later motions, modification proceedings, or an appeal when appropriate.

The court may order a protected exchange, limited or no overnight parenting time, supervision, payment of supervision costs by the parent who committed domestic violence, suspended access, an assessment or intervention program, counseling, a bond for the child's safe return, a confidential address, or another necessary condition. If the court also finds substance abuse, it may require abstinence and random testing.

Not unless the parent first overcomes the mandatory presumption. Unsupervised parenting time requires clear and convincing evidence, and the court must adopt precautions that prioritize the child and victim's safety.

Not while that parent remains restricted by the mandatory presumption. Sole or joint legal decision-making may be awarded only if the parent overcomes the presumption by clear and convincing evidence.

If the court finds that the parent who committed domestic violence has also abused alcohol or another substance, the court may require abstinence and random testing to ensure compliance. The order should be tailored to the findings and the safety needs in the case.

No. The Act prohibits ordering a domestic-violence victim to join the parent who committed domestic violence in treatment, counseling, or a forensic assessment, whether in person, virtual, or by telephone.

No. A child who is a domestic-violence victim may not be ordered to join that parent in treatment, counseling, or a forensic assessment.

Only after overcoming the mandatory presumption by clear and convincing evidence. Until then, the court may not award that parent sole or joint legal decision-making.

No. A completion certificate alone is not proof of rehabilitation. It must be accompanied by the necessary waiver to release treatment records, proof that the program was relevant and proportionate, a demonstrated understanding of the harm caused, and proof that treatment addressed any tendency to minimize or rationalize the abuse.

The rebuttal provisions do not create a fixed waiting period. When the issue can be raised depends on the posture of the case and the procedural rules for the hearing or modification request. The evidence matters more than a certificate or the passage of time alone.

Not automatically. The court must consider whether the domestic violence was severe or frequent enough that the passage of time is not a mitigating factor, along with the other rebuttal factors and current evidence.

The court must disregard the child's absence from the scene, the child's unawareness that domestic violence occurred, and the child's preference to reinstate, maintain, or increase contact with the parent who committed domestic violence. Those factors are irrelevant to the mandatory presumption.

The Act does not require a child to testify. Courts can receive domestic-violence evidence from many other sources, and whether a child is asked to participate depends on the facts, the judge, and Arizona procedure. Discuss any concern about a child's involvement with your attorney before the hearing.

There is a lot you can do before that day. Start with the current orders, organize a timeline, preserve records and messages, identify witnesses, and speak with a trauma-informed Arizona family-law attorney about the evidence and safety plan for the hearing.

Start with exactly what the written order says and whether it includes the findings the Act requires. A second consultation can help identify options for clarification, reconsideration, review, later modification, or preparation for the next evidentiary hearing.

Not everything. Communications with your attorney are generally privileged, but court filings and hearings may become part of the public record unless protected by law or court order. Mediation and other private resolution paths may be available when they are appropriate and safe.

Ask specific questions before hiring anyone. Find out how the attorney handles domestic-violence evidence, coercive control, older conduct, written findings, and the Act's burdens of proof. Also ask how the attorney approaches safety and communication with trauma-affected clients.

Ask how the attorney prepares clients to discuss trauma, whether the attorney has used domestic-violence experts, how they present coercive-control evidence, and how they would address old or uncorroborated abuse. Experience under the Alec and Lydia Act and a clear explanation of the presumption are useful indicators.

Start with your story. Create a dated timeline, preserve texts and records, list possible witnesses, and compare your current orders with what happened at the hearing. You likely have more useful detail than you think.