POLISCOPE
Back to bills
Part ofFamily Law →

The civic record

Read. Follow. Verify.
HB 1080INDIANASession 2026State Billdead
Did Not Advance

Indiana Restricts Court-Ordered Family Reunification Programs and Mandates Domestic Violence Training for Judges

Original title: Family reunification.

Last action · January 5, 2026: First reading: referred to Committee on JudiciarySponsors: Becky Cash and 1 other

Bill progressHistory & official text ↓
Introduced
Committee
Floor Vote
Passed
Law

Track this bill to get notified when it advances a stage. One tap to stop, anytime.

Public stanceCommunity reactions are separate from the official record and reporting.

What This Bill Proposed

Indiana House Bill 1080 prohibits the department of child services from recommending and courts from ordering s that involve overnight stays, custody transfers, no-contact orders, or coercive transport methods, effective July 1, 2026. Additionally, the measure requires the office of judicial administration to establish an annual domestic violence training program that family and juvenile law judges must attend starting January 1, 2027.

Why it matters

Judges and child welfare workers must alter their case management practices regarding family reunification, while judges presiding over family or juvenile law must complete annual training on domestic violence dynamics, child abuse, and trauma starting in 2027.

Who It Would Have Affected

Groups the bill's text would have affected, as described in the record. Being affected is not a position for or against it.

Directly affected

judges presiding over family law or juvenile law matters

Judges presiding over family or juvenile law must attend an annual judicial training program on domestic violence starting January 1, 2027.

Directly affected

department of child services

The department is prohibited from recommending specific types of family reunification programs that involve overnight stays, custody transfers, or coercive practices.

Directly affected

families involved in child services matters

Directly affected

office of judicial administration

The office is required to establish and conduct an annual judicial training program covering domestic violence and related topics.

Key Facts

  • The department of child services is prohibited from recommending family reunification programs that require no-contact orders, overnight or multi-day stays, custody transfers, private youth transporters using force or distress, or verbal abuse and isolation.
  • Courts are prohibited from ordering family reunification programs that require no-contact orders, overnight stays, custody transfers, coercive private transporters, or isolation of a child.
  • The office of judicial administration must establish and provide an annual judicial training program for individuals presiding over family or juvenile law matters.
  • The mandated judicial training program must cover topics including child sexual abuse, emotional abuse, coercive control, implicit and explicit bias, trauma, and domestic violence dynamics.
Show all 5 facts
  • Starting January 1, 2027, judges presiding over family law or juvenile law matters must attend the judicial training program at least once each calendar year.

Frequently Asked Questions

What types of family reunification programs are banned under this bill?
The bill bans programs that require a no-contact order, overnight or multi-day stays, out-of-state stays, a transfer of legal or physical custody, the use of s using force or distress, or the use of threats, coercion, verbal abuse, or isolation.
Who is required to attend the new judicial training program?
Any individual who presides over a family law or juvenile law matter must attend the annual training program established by the office of judicial administration starting January 1, 2027.
What subjects must be included in the judicial training program?
The training must cover child sexual abuse, emotional abuse, , bias related to domestic violence cases, trauma, short and long-term effects of domestic violence, risks to children residing with perpetrators, instances of domestic violence occurring without protective orders or substantiated findings, and perpetrator behavioral patterns.

What else do you want to know?

News Coverage

No news coverage found yet. Articles are indexed twice daily.

Follow the record

Votes, people, money & the original source

Where This Stands

This bill did not become law - Died at adjournment · in House committee.

Procedural history

3 actions
  1. Jan 5, 2026HouseIntroduced
    First reading: referred to Committee on Judiciary
  2. Jan 5, 2026House
    Coauthored by Representative Davis
  3. Jan 5, 2026House
    Authored by Representative Cash

Version history

Only one version on file - nothing to compare yet. As later stages (committee substitute, engrossed, enrolled) are captured, the redline appears here.

View official text →

Lobbying Activity

No state lobbying filings in our records match this bill. Federal lobbying reports (LDA) cover Congress, so they are not listed on state bills.

Full breakdown

Who this bill affects and the strongest case for and against it, written only from the bill’s own text.

Sponsors

Becky CashHouse · District 25RepublicanAuthor
Michelle DavisHouse · District 58RepublicanCoauthor

Connected Entities

Michelle Davis, General Assembly, Becky Cash
PersonMichelle Davis“Cosponsor of House Bill 1080”Map →
OrganizationGeneral Assembly“Legislative body passing the act”Map →
PersonBecky Cash“Primary sponsor of House Bill 1080”Map →

Sources

Open source document

iga.in.gov

Analysis Score

0–100
  • Significance20
    Lowered because this bill did not pass (its text scored 65)
  • Controversy45
    Intensity of disagreement among stakeholders
  • Entertainment5
    Compellingness for a non-policy-wonk reader
  • Buzz20
    Current news / social attention level

Publisher tools

Share or embed this record

POLISCOPE publisher tools

Share or embed this record