2024 Changes to Family Law

2024 Changes to California Family Law

There are some changes coming to California Family Law this year, effective September 1, 2024.

Below is a summary.

Family Code 3011(a): Old Law

If drug or alcohol abuse or domestic violence were alleged in custody proceeding,  courts had to consider whether visitations should be monitored.  They also had to explain on the record or in writing why they were not monitored.  If the parties stipulated to custody, this finding was not required.

Amended Family Code section 3011(a): New Law

If abuse is alleged, and the court makes an order for sole or joint custody or unsupervised visitations to the accused parent, the court shall state in writing or on the record “that the order is in the best interest of the child and protects the safety of the parties and the child” and specify the time, day, and location for exchanging the child. (FC. 3011(a)(5)(A)).

This finding is required even if the parties stipulated in writing or on the record to custody.

Where a protective order is granted, the court shall consider whether visitations to the restrained party should be suspended or denied, supervised or virtual (FC 3100(b)(1)). The part about virtual visitation is new and is defined in FC 3100(e).

Family Code 3011 (a): New Law

(5)(A) When allegations about a parent pursuant to paragraph (2) or (4) have been brought to the attention of the court in the current proceeding, and the court makes an order for sole or joint custody or unsupervised visitation to that parent, the court shall state its reasons in writing or on the record. In these circumstances, the court shall ensure that any order regarding custody or visitation is specific as to time, day, place, and manner of transfer of the child as set forth in subdivision (c) of Section 6323.

Family Code 3040: Old Law

None on mental health history.

The new law requires findings to be in writing or on the record.

Family Code 3040 (d): New Law

3040(d) (1) Commencing January 1, 2024, if a court finds that the effects of a parent’s, legal guardian’s, or relative’s history of or current mental illness are a factor in determining the best interest of the child under subdivision (a), the court shall do both of the following:

(A) Provide the parent, legal guardian, or relative with a list of local resources for mental health treatment.

(B) State its reasons for the finding in writing or on the record.

(2) This subdivision does not relieve a court from ensuring that the health, safety, and welfare of the child is the court’s primary concern in determining the best interests of children when making any order regarding the physical or legal custody, or visitation, of the child.

Family Code 3193: None.  This is new.

OLD LAW: This is a new section.


The “court shall not order family reunification treatments, programs, or services…,” which are broadly defined, “that, as a condition of enrollment or participation, require or result in” any of five prohibited circumstances Most notably, overnight stays and no contact orders with the other parent are prohibited. (FC 3193(a)(1) and (2).) This section does not prohibit dependency courts from ordering family reunification services. (Id. at 3193(b).)

A family court cannot order reunification programs if the program contains certain prohibited features.

Family Code 4061(a): Old Law

Under the previous law, add-ons (like childcare and uncovered medical expenses, are usually divided equally (50%) between the parties.  There is an option to change the division based on the parties’ relative net incomes.

Amended Family Code section 4061(a)

The new law will make it mandatory to allocate add-ons based on the parties’ incomes.

Family Code 4061 (a): New Law

Child support add-ons shall be apportioned according to the parties’ relative net incomes unless a party requests otherwise or the court determines a different division.

Section 4061(b) then explains how.

First, child support must be computed.

Then, any spousal support ordered shall be subtracted from the payor’s gross income and added to payee’s gross income.

Then, any child support ordered shall be subtracted from the payor’s net income but not added to the payee’s income.


Dad’s monthly income = $7,000
Mom’s monthly income = $3,000

The court ordered $1,000 in spousal support and $1,000 in child support payable to mother.

The situation looks like this:


Before support orders gross income:    $7,000          $3,000
After spousal support gross income:      $6,000         $4,000
After spousal support net income:          $5,000         $3,000
After child support net income:               $4,000 —
RESULTS                                                   $4,000         $3,000

TOTAL $7,000

Allocation of Add-Ons Per New Law

So, father should pay for the add-ons in the ratio of 4000/7000, or 4/7ths (57.1%) and mother should pay 3/7ths (42.9%). This calculation cannot be performed manually.

Using Dissomaster:

1. Calculate the guideline amount of child and spousal support.

2. If non-guideline orders are made, adjust DissoMaster™ accordingly using the user-specified payment field in the Support tab.

3. DissoMaster™ will calculate the payor’s net spendable income.

4. For the payee, subtract child support from the net spendable income in DissoMaster™.

5. Combine the net spendable incomes of both parties in steps 3 and 4.

6. The payor’s percentage is the ratio of their net spendable income to the combined net spendable income. The payee covers the balance.

In cases where the payor has a small timeshare, and guideline child and temporary spousal support orders are made, the payor may pay less than 50% of the add-ons. This may be true even with significantly higher gross income.

Family Code 4062 and 4063: Old Law

Under the old, there was no presumption of reasonableness for childcare add-ons necessary for work. However, there was such a presumption for uninsured medical costs. The request for reimbursement had to be made within 30 days.

Amendments to Family Code Sections 4062 and 4063

Under new law,  paid expenses for childcare necessary for work are rebuttably presumed to be reasonable, and requests for reimbursement must be made no later than 90 days after accruing or paying the expense.

“There is a rebuttable presumption that the costs actually paid for the uninsured health care… and for childcare that is for employment or reasonably necessary for education or training for employment skills are reasonable” subject to certain exceptions related to court-ordered health insurance. (FC 4063(a)(2)(d).) Additionally, the parent seeking reimbursement must do so within a reasonable time, not exceeding 90 days after accruing or paying the expense. (FC 4063(b).)


Have a case like this?

Family matters are extremely personal, and it is important for us to know details of your case before giving advice. Each case is different, and it is important to find an attorney you trust. To arrange an appointment, please call us at (626) 765-5767 between 8:30am – 5:00pm, Mondays to Fridays, or fill out the form below.

Schedule a Consultation