Committee Summary for House Children and Family Law (10/21/2025)

Bill/Time	Type	Title	Sponsor
Unclear 00:05:52.080 - 8:34:38 AM	General Working Session	Unclear

Unclear: Subcommittee Chair (unnamed) Information Only00:05:52.080 - 8:34:38 AM; The chair opens the subcommittee work session on changes to family court, notes lack of quorum, plans to submit reports for opinions, discusses a misunderstood deadline from the speaker's office allowing preliminary reports via email, expresses encouragement for continuing work next year possibly as a full committee, mentions unresolved issues like 'one judge one case', hands out subgroup assignments, notes personal delays due to surgery, and suggests subgroups can meet informally post-deadline.
Unclear: Subcommittee Chair (unnamed) Information Only00:06:39.280 - 8:35:25 AM; The chair continues by referencing a conversation with the speaker's office clarifying no strict end-of-October deadline, allowing email voting for unofficial reports, and potential for full committee work next year on remaining issues including 'one judge one case' from 30-year review reports; distributes subgroup assignments, acknowledges summer delays, and plans to meet on assigned topics in November.
Unclear: Representative Greg and Representative Raymond Information Only00:08:53.839 - 8:37:39 AM; Representatives Greg and Raymond present on improving New Hampshire family court pre-trial and mediation practices. They highlight issues like judges waiving procedures causing inconsistencies, delays, and confusion for families; varying mediator training and oversight; lack of clear rights information; insufficient domestic violence screening; uneven training in trauma, child development, and domestic violence; pressure to mediate; and no robust complaint system. They reference robust programs in Oregon, Nebraska, California, and Texas, which span political spectra. Recommendations include standardizing pre-trial orders with 30-day case management, clear deadlines in simple language, mandatory domestic violence screening, increasing mediator certification to 60 hours training plus 20 hours supervised practice, continuing education in key areas, a mentorship program (e.g., Texas's two-year model), an independent oversight board with public roster and complaint investigations, plain language info sheets, and piloting in a few counties before statewide rollout to assess effectiveness and funding needs.
Unclear: Unnamed Committee Member Information Only00:16:45.120 - 8:45:31 AM; A committee member discusses familiarity with Family Division Court Rule 2.13 on mediation, noting it orders mediation with exceptions for domestic violence under RSA 461-A:17, but testimony from prior committees indicated practice doesn't match expectations, especially for self-represented parties (80% of cases). Emphasizes timing and preparation for effective mediation, the need for parties to want to settle post-discovery, and shares details on mediation agreements covering confidentiality, impartiality, no legal advice, honesty, and inadmissibility in court. Notes remote mediation options via Zoom, especially in domestic violence cases, and suggests adding random investigations of mediations to celebrate successes alongside addressing complaints. Tasks another member to highlight strengths from Representative Bernardi's bill on mediation despite its overall flaws.
Unclear: Unnamed Committee Member (Counselor) Information Only00:19:04.640 - 8:47:50 AM; The member explains existing court forms like the mediation participation agreement and remote mediation options, notes certification under RSA 328-C, and discusses challenges with self-represented litigants' preparation and timing. Describes alternative dispute resolution tools like the mediator preparation form for self-represented parties and more detailed summaries for represented ones. Introduces neutral case evaluation using retired judges to predict case outcomes, which is cost-effective and can settle cases early. Touches on educating self-represented litigants, references the child impact seminar and mandatory disclosures under Rule 1.25-A, and stresses the need for parties to educate themselves on processes.
Unclear: Representative (possibly Markeel) Information Only00:28:59.440 - 8:57:45 AM; The representative emphasizes that families feel lost and overwhelmed by court information, especially during stressful times, and suggests more user-friendly options like videos at accessible reading levels beyond the child impact seminar. Notes collaboration with the bar association for pro se litigant resources, critiques over-reliance on TV portrayals of court, and highlights the first appearance for process explanations.
Unclear: Jodie Nelson (via presentation) Information Only00:31:56.880 - 9:00:42 AM; Representative Nelson's subgroup on the cost of litigants retrieving trial transcripts (provided by outside sources, not courts) is presented in her absence due to a sick child. The materials include a Judicial Branch request form for transcripts at state expense and a multi-page report on how states handle family matters in specialized vs. general jurisdiction courts, background questions, and notes that robust mediation programs are often in non-family court states (with Texas as an exception).
Unclear: Unnamed Speaker (likely committee member) Information Only00:37:31.760 - 9:06:17 AM; The speaker discusses a document on family court systems, highlighting the spectrum of approaches from integrated to separate courts. They express excitement about specialized family courts, drawing an analogy to medical specialists, suggesting judges could specialize in family matters rather than rotating between probate and family cases. They propose enhancing New Hampshire's family court like in states such as Hawaii, New York, South Carolina, West Virginia, Rhode Island, and Delaware, with dedicated judges, continuing education, and a social worker aspect. They humorously suggest a field trip or Zoom to Hawaii for learning.
Unclear: Jodie Nelson (committee member) Information Only00:38:40.400 - 9:07:26 AM; Jodie Nelson shares her experience from New York, where she worked as a forensic interviewer and in child protective services, mostly in family court cases often following criminal proceedings related to sexual abuse. She notes positives like judges knowing families well, presence of family drug courts, attorneys for parents and children (standard there and now passing in NH), and specialized staff. Downsides include limited judges (one main and one substitute in Warren County), leading to scheduling issues if recusal was needed, and strong emotions if a parent disliked the judge. She agrees it's not a disqualifier for separate family courts and values the expertise in specialized settings.
Unclear: Representative Markel (committee member) Information Only00:41:56.000 - 9:10:42 AM; Representative Markel supports the idea of one judge per case for continuity, similar to a doctor staying with a patient, with exceptions for scheduling or ethical conflicts. They emphasize the benefits seen in previous special committees' reviews, which highlighted 'one case, one judge,' easier with more budget for judges and staff. They stress collegial problem-solving on family court issues, including judicial staffing shortages, and the need for a deep bench to prevent burnout from high-emotion cases like child abuse and neglect.
Unclear: Unnamed Speaker (likely committee chair) Information Only00:43:07.680 - 9:11:53 AM; The speaker reflects on field trips to family courts, praising the judges' knowledge, compassion, and helpfulness, especially for pro se litigants. They share anecdotes of judges patiently guiding unrepresented parties and handling evidence rules. They discuss a case where they advised a litigant on evidence admissibility, stressing the need for judges with strong legal training. They advocate for introductory materials in plain language to prepare pro se litigants, acknowledging the complexity of law even for educated people, and compare judges to specialized doctors.
Unclear: Jodie Nelson (committee member) Information Only00:45:25.760 - 9:14:11 AM; Jodie Nelson affirms seeing New Hampshire judges being patient and helpful with pro se litigants, guiding them through processes and evidentiary issues. She notes ongoing learning in family law despite decades of experience and the frustrations involved for all parties.
Unclear: Unnamed Speaker (likely committee chair) Information Only00:48:45.200 - 9:17:31 AM; The speaker continues on the need for specialized knowledge in family court, suggesting introductory materials focus on common issues, not advanced topics. They note the document's comprehensiveness on court operations.

DeSimone, Debra(Chairman)(R)[A-]2024	Nelson, Jodi(Clerk)(R)[B+]2024	Seidel, Sheila(V Chairman)(R)[A-]2024
McMahon, Charles(R)[A-]2024	Rice, Kimberly(R)[B-]2022	Love, David(R)[A]2024
Pearson, Mark(R)[B-]2024	Korzen, Lori(R)	Georges, Mary(D)
Raymond, Heather(D)[CT]2024	Gregg, Alicia(D)[CT]2024	Petrigno, Peter(D)[CT]2024
Grossman, Gaby(D)[CT]2024	Levesque, Cassandra (D)[CT]2024	Malone, Amy(D)
Markell, Jay(R)