Utah HB303 Adds 'Coercive Control' to Custody Decisions Under Title 81

Utah's HB303, passed in the 2026 General Session, creates a statutory definition of "coercive control" and requires family courts to weigh it in child custody and parent-time decisions. The law also overhauls the court-appointed custody-evaluator process under new Title 81, Chapter 9, Part 5, letting either parent seek removal of a biased evaluator. Utah parents in contested cases should understand these two changes now.

Key Facts

Utah reported the reform through Utah News Dispatch, which covered how "Om's Law" supporters pushed to build on the state's 2024 family court reform. The 2026 measure moves Utah past a purely physical-harm framework and into recognizing patterns of controlling behavior that many survivors describe but courts historically struggled to name.

Why this matters legally

HB303 changes how Utah courts evaluate parental fitness by naming coercive control as a factor in the best-interest analysis. Coercive control, as the statute frames it, is a pattern of behavior that interferes with another person's autonomy — including financial control, isolation from friends and family, and intensive monitoring or surveillance. Previously, a parent alleging this kind of harm had to fit it into general domestic-violence or "conduct" categories, which often missed non-physical abuse entirely. Now Utah courts have express statutory language to consider when one parent has systematically controlled the other. This matters because custody outcomes turn on the best interests of the child, and a controlling co-parent poses documented risks to co-parenting stability.

The evaluator reform is equally significant. Custody evaluations frequently drive the outcome of a contested case, so a single evaluator's bias can shape a child's living arrangement for years. Under the new Title 81, Chapter 9, Part 5 process, either parent may seek removal of an evaluator they believe is biased. This creates a procedural safeguard that did not clearly exist before and gives parents a concrete remedy rather than a general objection. For anyone facing a custody evaluation, the ability to challenge the evaluator changes the strategic landscape of the case.

How Utah law handles this

Utah recodified its entire family law code into Title 81 effective in 2024, consolidating provisions that were previously scattered across Title 30 and Title 78B. HB303 slots into that new structure, placing the custody-evaluator overhaul in Chapter 9, Part 5. Utah courts decide custody — now called parental rights and parent-time — under a best-interest standard that weighs each parent's conduct, the child's relationship with each parent, and each parent's ability to co-parent. Coercive control now sits within that conduct analysis rather than outside it.

Utah's approach builds directly on 2024's "Om's Law," named for a child at the center of a family court case, which began reforming how the state handles allegations of abuse and evaluator conduct. HB303 continues that trajectory by expanding the definition of harm courts must consider and by tightening oversight of the professionals who advise judges. Utah parent-time is generally governed by statutory schedules under Title 81, and evaluators often recommend deviations from those schedules based on their findings. Because those recommendations carry heavy weight, the new removal mechanism functions as a check on the most influential input in many contested cases. Parents can review how parenting plans and standard schedules work before an evaluation begins.

Practical takeaways

1. Document patterns, not just incidents. Coercive control is defined as a pattern — financial restriction, isolation, and monitoring over time. Keep a dated record of controlling behaviors, financial statements, and communications rather than relying on a single event.

2. Raise coercive control early. If it applies to your situation, tell your attorney at intake so it can be framed within Utah's best-interest analysis under Title 81 from the start of the case, not mid-litigation.

3. Vet your custody evaluator. Under the new Chapter 9, Part 5 process, either parent may seek removal of a biased evaluator. Learn the evaluator's methods and background, and preserve any evidence of bias in case you need to move for removal.

4. Understand the parent-time baseline. Use our parenting-time calculator for Utah to see how standard schedules translate into overnights before an evaluator proposes changes.

5. Separate safety from strategy. If you are in immediate danger, coercive-control provisions do not replace emergency protective orders — call 911 or the National Domestic Violence Hotline at 1-800-799-7233. Custody reform and safety planning are different tracks.

6. Get a plan for next steps. A personalized divorce roadmap can help you sequence the evaluation, disclosures, and hearings involved in a contested Utah custody case, and connect you with a Utah divorce attorney who understands the recodified code.

Coercive control provisions also intersect with relocation disputes, where one parent's controlling conduct can bear on whether a move serves the child's interests. As Utah courts apply HB303, the interpretation of "pattern" and "autonomy" will develop through case law over the coming years, so early guidance from experienced counsel matters.

If you are navigating a Utah custody case and think coercive control or a questionable evaluation may affect your outcome, talk with a qualified Utah family law attorney who can apply the new Title 81 provisions to your specific facts.

This article discusses recent news and provides general legal commentary. It does not constitute legal advice. Every case is unique. Consult a qualified family law attorney for advice specific to your situation.