Day 5: Keeping families together where it’s safe to do so (SB 122)
The family is the core building block of civilization. Everything else, our schools, our churches, our communities, works better when families stay intact. So when the law can protect that bond without compromising safety, it should.
SB 122 has judges consider whether a defendant is the primary caretaker of a dependent child at sentencing. It doesn’t excuse the crime or guarantee leniency. It gives the court a real option: an alternative sentence that keeps a parent connected to their child, with required programs and services, and the judge can revoke that arrangement and send the defendant to prison if they don’t hold up their end.
Some will rightly ask: what if the parent isn’t a good influence on the child to begin with? That’s exactly why this isn’t automatic. The judge reviews each case individually, weighing the nature of the crime, the family circumstances, and whether keeping that parent-child relationship intact actually serves the child’s wellbeing. A judge who believes a parent is dangerous or destructive to a child’s welfare still has full discretion to reject the alternative sentence and impose prison time. This bill doesn’t tie a judge’s hands, it gives them another tool for cases where family preservation truly is in the child’s best interest.
Sponsored by Louisville’s Senator Julie Raque Adams. Passed the House 83-7 and the Senate, in final concurrence, 37-0.
(Note: There are two additional policy changes that were rolled into SB 122–one related to protecting children in domestic violence situations and one related to mental health laws—,and they will each be focused on later with a post of their own.)
