Proposed ‘Kyra’s Law’ Nearing Enactment in New York, Sparks Intense Family Court Debate Over Abuse Claims

Article – Andersen, Tate & Carr, P.C., Atlanta provides legal representation in real estate and banking, business, civil litigation, zoning and land use, government relations, estate planning matters and criminal law. 

New York’s family court system is about to get a massive jolt. The advancement of ‘Kyra’s Law’—Senate Bill S5998 and Assembly Bill A06194—through the New York Legislature represents a potential legislative earthquake. This critical bill was triggered by the preventable death of two-year-old Kyra Franchetti, who tragically died at the hands of her father despite her mother’s repeated warnings to the court. As of July 31, 2025, the bill has passed the Senate and has now moved forward, awaiting action in the Assembly.

For years, family law insiders have acknowledged the system’s failings in abuse cases. Now, those concerns have exploded into a public demand for change. This is more than just another statute; it’s a significant reform designed to force judges to prioritize child safety.

This shift is expected to create considerable controversy in custody battles across the state. The question on every attorney’s mind is: Is this the dawn of a new era for child protection or the start of a new challenge for due process?

The Mandates: What Proposed ‘Kyra’s Law’ Actually Demands

This isn’t a minor tweak. Proposed ‘Kyra’s Law’ is a comprehensive overhaul designed to stop practices critics say have endangered children for decades. Its premise for family court is simple, yet revolutionary: believe the child, protect the child.

So, what’s actually in the fine print? If enacted, the bill would introduce a set of rigid, non-negotiable requirements for judges handling custody cases involving abuse allegations. This is about taking judicial discretion and putting strong guardrails on it.

The Bill’s Core Pillars

1. Mandatory, Specialized Judicial Training: Judges can no longer “learn on the job.” The bill requires intensive, ongoing training on the dynamics of family violence, child abuse, and trauma. The goal is to eliminate outdated myths about abuse that have long plagued custody decisions.
2. Child Safety as the Top Priority: The bill explicitly states that the health and safety of the child must be the primary, paramount concern. This overrides all other factors, including the historical preference for keeping both parents involved.
3. Restrictions on “Parental Alienation” Claims: The bill seeks to curb the misuse of “parental alienation” claims. It stipulates that a parent making a “good faith allegation” that was based on a reasonable belief supported by facts of child abuse, child neglect, or the effects of domestic violence shall not be deprived of rights to custody, visitation, or contact with the child based solely on that particular belief or the reasonable actions that were taken based on that belief without a full evidentiary hearing. This directly challenges a legal tactic advocates say has been used to silence abuse victims.
4. Full Evidentiary Hearings Required: The bill mandates that courts conduct a prompt evidentiary hearing upon the application of any party or attorney for the child who asserts “facially credible allegations that, if true, would pose a substantial risk to the child’s safety.” Such claims cannot be dismissed without a comprehensive examination of the evidence, including specific factors like a party’s history of domestic violence, police reports, and other risk indicators. This counters the practice in some courts of making swift decisions based on limited information or reports from court-appointed evaluators with questionable training.

This shift is monumental. It’s happening as New York’s entire child welfare landscape is in upheaval; lawmakers are also debating bills that could end anonymous child abuse reporting to the state’s hotline. These changes reflect a growing distrust in the systems meant to protect children, a sentiment echoed by courts grappling with child welfare agency supervision limits.

The New Courtroom Battlefield: Litigation in the Post-Kyra Bill Era

If enacted, the bill is set to create a new courtroom dynamic. Family law attorneys and criminal defense lawyers are gearing up for a significant shift in how these cases are litigated. The evidentiary bar is moving, and the stakes have never been higher.

1. Judicial Training Meets Reality: The bill’s training requirement is a game-changer. Judges will now need to understand the intricate details of abuse, differentiating between unfounded accusations and credible threats and parsing complex charges with life-altering consequences. This includes understanding the specific legal definitions and evidentiary standards for offenses like cruelty to children in the first degree, where the bar for conviction is high and the penalties, which can include up to 20 years imprisonment in states like Georgia, are immense.
2. For lawyers, this means preparing cases for a judiciary that is, at least in theory, far more sophisticated on these issues.
3. The Defense Attorney’s Dilemma: Criminal defense attorneys are sounding the alarm. They argue the bill, while well-intentioned, could, in practice, create an environment in family court where any allegation of abuse, however unsubstantiated initially, might place a burden on the accused parent that feels akin to being “guilty until proven innocent.”
4. Unlike criminal proceedings, which require indisputable proof, which means ‘beyond a reasonable doubt,’ New York family courts generally rely on a ‘preponderance of the evidence’ standard, a lower legal threshold that amplifies these concerns for accused parents.
5. The fear is that the pendulum will swing too far, with any allegation of abuse, however flimsy, being enough to strip a parent of their rights. This creates a parallel justice system where the burden of proof feels lower than in a criminal trial, a concern echoed in cases nationwide where parental rights are challenged. When allegations escalate to severe criminal charges, understanding the specifics of offenses such as cruelty to children 1st degree becomes paramount for adequate legal defense.
6. A Flood of Litigation? Expect a potential surge in civil litigation. The tragic cases involving widespread abuse allegations at JCCA facilities in New York show a clear trend: survivors and their families are increasingly using the courts to seek accountability from institutions. The enactment of ‘Kyra’s Law’ may embolden more parents to file suits, not just for custody, but for damages against individuals and systems they believe failed their children.

The Ripple Effect: Is a National Reckoning on the Horizon?

New York rarely acts in a vacuum. Legal professionals across the country are watching closely, asking if this could become the new national standard.

The push for reform isn’t unique to the Empire State. A growing movement is currently challenging the status quo of family courts nationwide. However, the approach varies dramatically, creating a patchwork of standards and philosophies. This sets up a fascinating clash of legal theories on protecting children and parental rights.

For instance, while New York is doubling down on making it easier to prove abuse in court, states like Texas and Georgia are moving to make it harder to wrongfully accuse parents, providing them with more power to challenge abuse claims, such as requiring a warrant for child removal without imminent danger.

Meanwhile, Washington State’s Senate Bill 5599 prioritizes youth autonomy in specific cases, allowing youth seeking gender-affirming or reproductive care to be sheltered without parental notification.

At the federal level, the proposed “Kahleb and Ryleigh Collins Act” aims to increase accountability for child welfare workers by removing qualified immunity, allowing families to sue them directly for negligence. This highlights the fundamental divide in approaches.

The Final Verdict: Protection or Peril?

Proposed ‘Kyra’s Law’ has drawn a clear line. On one side are the child safety advocates who see it as a long-overdue shield for the most vulnerable. On the other hand, there are those in the legal community who see a dangerous erosion of due process that could weaponize abuse allegations in contentious divorces.

The truth? It will likely be both. The bill will undoubtedly save some children from Kyra Franchetti’s fate. However, it will also be tested and potentially exploited in high-conflict custody litigation. For legal professionals, navigating this new landscape will require more skill, diligence, and a keen understanding that the aftershocks of this bill will be felt for years to come. The only question is which state will be next to join the fray.