Expressing the sense of Congress that child safety is the first priority of custody and visitation adjudications, and that State courts should improve adjudications of custody where family violence is alleged.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the House concurrent resolution. I thank my colleague on the Judiciary Committee for his leadership.

I want to indicate that, first and foremost, this bipartisan resolution expresses the sense of Congress that child safety should be the top priority of any custody and parenting court adjudications, and that courts should resolve safety risks and claims of domestic violence first, before taking any other interest into consideration.

The resolution also underscores Congress' strong support for the use of scientific-based evidence in family court, including reliance on expert professionals with expertise in relevant types of abuse, trauma, and behaviors of victims and perpetrators by, among other things, establishing specific standards for the preparation of professional reports.

This resolution also encourages States to consider models through which such professional experts can be appointed and paid directly by the courts as needed, and expresses the sense of Congress that we hold hearings examining family court practices with regard to the fair adjudication of children's safety and civil rights.

I think many of us as Members of Congress who deal in family issues, and as the founder and co-chair of the Congressional Children's Caucus, and being a student of the Family Protective Services--Child Protective Services, I have seen more than one case where a child is returned to a family and gets caught up in the unfortunate practices of that family situation, that home situation. Yes, they wind up losing their life, children as young as 1 and 2 and 3 years old, helpless, without being able to help themselves.

H. Con. Res. 72 acknowledges that the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights has found that the United States has failed in its legal obligation to protect women and children from domestic violence.

It certainly seems appropriate, as we debate this, that I ask my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, and it is not too late, to join me in putting the Violence Against Women Act on the floor of the House with over 160 cosponsors that specifically address the question of domestic violence, domestic abuse. So many of our collaborating groups from all over the country, both conservative and otherwise, are arguing and advocating for the passage of the Violence Against Women Act before its expiration on September 30, 2018. It would be a complement to this sense of Congress.

In recognition of the fact that the problem of domestic violence is among the most serious social problems in this country, the resolution makes a number of important findings in this regard. Child abuse, in and of itself, is a major public health issue. It costs billions of dollars annually and, unfortunately, the loss of children's lives.

But the cost of child abuse cannot be measured in simple monetary terms because, as a study by the Centers for Disease Control tells us, children who experience adverse childhood experiences are at a greater risk to develop certain chronic diseases like heart disease and cancer. The consequences for children who experience abuse and neglect are long-lasting, long-reaching, and cannot be measured easily.

As this resolution finds, child sexual abuse, too, as horrific as it is, is a matter that goes routinely underdocumented and underaddressed. Time and again, research confirms that allegations of domestic violence, child abuse, and child sexual abuse are often discounted when it comes to child custody litigation.

This is with family members or guardians of a particular child. Tragically, abusive parents are often granted custody or unprotected parenting time, which places children at constant risk. The risk of abuse to the child increases when a perpetrator of domestic violence separates from a domestic partner.

Most disturbing is the resolution's finding that documents a minimum of 568 murders of children in the United States in a 10-year period by a parent involved in divorce, separation, custody, visitation, or child support proceedings. In many of these instances, the family courts granted access to the child by the abusive parent over the objection of the protective parent.

Finally, this resolution recognizes the need for courts to appoint well-qualified professionals, at court expense, who will apply scientifically sound and evidence-based theories to assist in the adjudication of custody litigation. Because such assistance is not routinely provided, parents seeking to vindicate their rights in custody disputes often incur overwhelming debt and may even need to file for bankruptcy relief as a result. In the United States, this should be unacceptable.

For these reasons, I encourage my colleagues to join me in supporting H. Con. Res. 72.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of House Concurrent Resolution 72.

First and foremost, this bipartisan resolution expresses the sense of Congress that child safety should be the top priority of any custody and parenting court adjudications and that courts should resolve safety risks and claims of domestic violence first, before taking other interests into consideration.

The resolution also underscores Congress's strong support for the use of scientific-based evidence in family court, including reliance on expert professionals with expertise in relevant types of abuse, trauma, and behaviors of victims and perpetrators by, among other things, establishing specific standards for the preparation of professional reports.

This resolution also encourages States to consider models through which such professional experts can be appointed and paid directly by the courts, as needed.

And, it expresses the sense of Congress that we hold hearings examining family court practices with regards to the fair adjudication of children's safety and civil rights.

House Concurrent Resolution 72 acknowledges that the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights has found that the United States has failed in its legal obligation to protect women and children from domestic violence.

In recognition of the fact that the problem of domestic violence is among the most serious social problems in this country, the resolution makes a number of important findings in this regard. Child abuse, in- and-of-itself, is a major public health issue--and it costs billions of dollars annually. But the ``cost'' of child abuse cannot be measured in simple monetary terms because, as a study by the Centers for Disease Control tells us, children who experience ``adverse childhood experiences'' are at greater risk to develop certain chronic diseases, like heart disease and cancer. The consequences for children who experience abuse and neglect are long-lasting and long-reaching and cannot be measured easily.

As this resolution finds, child sexual abuse, too, as horrific as it is, is a matter that goes routinely under-documented and under- addressed. But, time and again, research confirms that allegations of domestic violence, child abuse, and child sexual abuse are often discounted when it comes to child custody litigation. Tragically, abusive parents are often granted custody or unprotected parenting time, which places children at constant risk, and the risk of abuse to the child increases when a perpetrator of domestic violence separates from a domestic partner.

Most disturbing is the resolution's finding that documents a minimum of 568 murders of children in the United States in a 10-year period by a parent involved in divorce, separation, custody, visitation, or child support proceedings. In many of these instances, the family courts granted access to the child by the abusive parent, over the objection of the protective parent.

Finally, this resolution recognizes the need for courts to appoint well-qualified professionals, at court expense, who will apply scientifically sound and evidence-based theories, to assist in the adjudication of custody litigation. Because such assistance is not routinely provided, parents seeking to vindicate their rights in custody disputes often incur overwhelming debt and may even need to file for bankruptcy relief as a result. In the United States, this should be unacceptable.

For these reasons, I encourage my colleagues to join me in supporting House Concurrent Resolution 72.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I might consume.

Mr. Speaker, first of all, let me certainly thank Mr. Sessions, my colleague out of Texas, for his very important words and moving commentary. I thank Congressman Rutherford for his service and commitment, and the other cosponsors of this legislation, because it really has more impact.

Let me conclude my remarks by acknowledging a tragedy in my district. As a hardworking mother was separating from her spouse, it had not yet gotten to the court, but it is evidence of what can happen. The remarks of the dad were, ``Bring them over for me to see them one more time.''

And even though the relationship between mom and dad was hostile, mom wanted to be cooperative, and brought them over and left them for a moment as she went to her small business.

The next call she got was the shrill of police and neighbors screaming, and his call to her, the parent's call, the father's call, and he said, ``Now come over and see your two dead children, because I have killed them.''

So this is constant throughout the Nation, and we need intervention and we need recognition of the tragedies that can happen.

So as I previously stated, I strongly support passage of H. Con. Res 72. It is a sober acknowledgement of how family courts in the United States are failing to protect the very children they are sworn to protect in cases involving domestic violence, and obviously these cases have histories of domestic violence. But also as a legislative body, we have far more effective ways to deal with these problems. They can complement H. Con. Res. 72.

So I would like to, again, reinforce the bill that was introduced last July--this July, that I introduced, over 150 cosponsors, I believe. I introduced a robust bill to reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act.

This VAWA reauthorization seeks to address the problem of domestic violence from a holistic perspective by attacking the problem from many different angles with resources, recognizing all the different components that are now before us. We need to reauthorize VAWA, not in any watered down fashion, and we need to do it in complement to H. Con. Res. 72. And if we hope to make any dent in this very serious problem and to protect women and children and men who are abused and victimized day in and day out, this is how we need to do it, pass bills like the concurrent resolution and also VAWA.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this resolution and join me in this bipartisan effort as well to pass VAWA.

As I previously stated, I strongly support passage of House Concurrent Resolution 72. It is a sober acknowledgement of how family courts in the United States are failing to protect the very children they are sworn to protect, in cases involving domestic violence.

But, as a legislative body, we have far more effective ways to deal with these problems than merely passing concurrent resolutions. Last July, I introduced a robust bill to reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act. This VAWA reauthorization seeks to address the problem of domestic violence from a holistic perspective, by attacking the problem from many different angles. We need to reauthorize VAWA--not in any watered-down fashion--if we hope to make any dent into this very serious problem and to protect women, children and men who are abused and victimized day in and day out.

I urge my colleagues to support House Concurrent Resolution 72.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the distinguished gentleman, who spent his career not only as a sheriff, but a duly- elected constitutional Member in Florida, but also to the distinguished gentlewoman from Houston, Texas, who has served as an attorney serving the people of Houston, Texas.

Mr. Speaker, I rise tonight to make sure that as we respectfully address this issue, H. Con. Res. 72, which urges States to look at improved family court proceedings of child custody cases, ensuring that child safety is a top priority, it makes clear that Congress will use its oversight authority to engage in this issue also.

We do not come at this issue lightly, Mr. Speaker. As a matter of fact, the Domestic Violence Legal Empowerment and Appeals Project has provided a great deal of information, not only to Members of Congress, but by visiting the Members, making sure that they understand that their work with the Center for Judicial Excellence and the Protective Parents Association of California have made sure that they saw these issues clearly and talked to Members of Congress about our ideas, not only as we fund Federal programs, but as we understand in our discussions with States that we prioritize and help them look at what is, seemingly, a national crisis.

This national crisis is about how our children are dealt with in the court system and looked at. Specifically, this is a concurrent resolution that urges States to develop family court procedures to resolve claims of abuse and family violence before making any other determination in the case, allowing courts to focus on these allegations affecting child safety independently.

What did I just say? Well, what I just said is many times in court proceedings where there is a family violence circumstance, where there is stress in a family, there are examples that either side might talk about what is in the best interest of the child.

And courts across this country, whether at their local court, whether a state court, we are asking them to understand that this national crisis deals with children that are being placed in a circumstance that might not be in their best interest, and it calls on States to prohibit the use of discredited or unscientific theories in their family courts. In other words, there are many times provisions in a court or a bias of a court to take one side or the other.

Finally, it highlights the problems that some litigants--these are people back in their own home States--face regarding mandatory fees, and Congress is asking the States to look at these.

Many times, as the distinguished gentlewoman from Houston talked about, there are fee structures which keep families from fully participating to protect their children because of the cost. This is an important issue.

Tragically, millions of children are impacted in the United States of America. They call it domestic violence or child abuse, but the bottom line is that the resulting harm is lasting to our children. Physical, sexual, or emotional abuse, this trauma stays with our children for some period of time and many times it lasts for a lifetime.

It also imposes billions of dollars on society where these children need to be handled, dealt with, and worked through a system for them to understand what happened in their childhood would create some difficulties later in their life.

Simply put, we believe that family courts need better expertise. Better expertise not only in terms of the legal counsel that is involved, but perhaps outside professionals who would address these issues.

In my home State of Texas, we have had to reevaluate the circumstances, not just of divorce, but of domestic violence where a child is involved, trying to focus more directly on the needs of the child and then having that family, two sides for sure, who would come together to see what is in the best interest of that child.

Family courts need to address abuse, and once again, many times it is not uncommon for them to have to address these through the frailties of a system, frailties of people who give testimony, and perhaps theories that are not always in the best interest of the child that might be proposed in court.

So one story in particular has it of a young girl named Kyra who tragically lost her life at the age of 2 in 2016 while her family was going through the court system. The focus became the battle, not the child, and the child fell in between the processes and, unfortunately, the tragedy occurred because of this huge disagreement between the family to where her father brutally murdered her before setting the house on fire and killing himself.

The tragedy involved, rather than highlighting the differences between these two, of the safety of the child. And the safety of the child and of the mother is vitally important.

At least 653 child murders by a parent involved in a divorce, separation, custody, or visitation, child support have been documented in the United States over the last 10 years. That is a tragedy. That is a nightmare that is happening directly before us.

This is why we believe that listening to outside groups, such as the Domestic Violence Legal Empowerment and Appeals Project and the Judicial Excellence Coalition have come to Congress to say, we would like for you to see what is happening back in your States, back in your communities, back where you are from, Members of Congress, and see if you can shine a spotlight on showing how important children and women are, not just in our society, but in the court system.

So what I would say is I would like to thank my colleagues, the gentleman who started this, the gentleman from Pennsylvania, Congressman Pat Meehan, for his dedication to this issue, as well as my dear friend from New York, Congresswoman Carolyn B. Maloney,

for her leadership as she has joined me on so many issues where we deal with women's health and women's safety, children's health, children's safety, including disabled children and people who cannot protect themselves.

Mr. Speaker, whether you live in Florida, Texas, Pennsylvania, or wherever you might be in this country, it is important for us to understand that the focus on children's safety in court matters is essential to the Nation's health and support for the future.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the distinguished gentleman and the chairman of the committee, Chairman Goodlatte, for allowing this to come forth at this time.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished gentleman from Florida for yielding me this time.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 72) expressing the sense of Congress that child safety is the first priority of custody and visitation adjudications, and that State courts should improve adjudications of custody where family violence is alleged, as amended.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H. Con. Res. 72, currently under consideration.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased we are voting today on this resolution, which expresses the sense of Congress that child safety should be the top priority of custody and visitation adjudications, and that State courts should improve adjudications of custody where family violence is alleged.

Custody adjudications are especially difficult cases, fraught with emotion and complex relationships. States must ensure that the judges presiding over these cases are trained to understand these dynamics and apply appropriate evidentiary standards to parties' evidence.

Most importantly, States should ensure that in these disputes, children's safety comes first.

We have seen tragedies happen throughout the United States where the courts failed the children involved in custody disputes. Over the past decade, the Center for Judicial Excellence has documented 653 child homicides across the United States by a parent involved in a conflict related to divorce, separation, custody, visitation, or child support.

Last year, Ana Estevez's 5-year-old son, Piqui, was murdered by her ex-husband. Despite her efforts to obtain sole custody of Piqui due to her ex-husband's history of abuse, her plea was rejected.

Her estranged husband picked up Piqui, as part of their joint custody arrangement, and took him to Disneyland. That was the last time Ms. Estevez saw her son.

His body was found 2 months later, and her estranged husband eventually confessed to the murder, a tragedy that should never have happened.

Today, we take a step in expressing to States that they must pay special attention to these cases. We hope States will heed this resolution and resolve to evaluate their family court systems and implement measures to put child safety first.

I thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sessions) for bringing this resolution before us. I urge my colleagues to support this resolution, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sessions).

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time to close.

Mr. Speaker, I first want to thank the gentlewoman for her comments and for her hard work on this resolution. I also want to thank Chairman Sessions for bringing this forward today.

I want to encourage all of my colleagues here to vote in the affirmative for H. Con. Res. 72.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that I be considered as the first sponsor of H. Con. Res. 72, originally introduced by Representative Meehan of Pennsylvania, for the purposes of adding cosponsors and requesting reprintings pursuant to clause 7 of rule XII.