It is not every day that a State issues a new custody statute. On Governor Phil Murphy’s last day, he did just that by signing into law S4510, which amended N.J.S.A 9:2-4. Calling it an amendment, however, is inappropriate as this bill has made the prior statute unrecognizable, redefining what the public policy of the State of New Jersey regarding child custody.
On January 20, 2026, S4510 was signed into law and became effective immediately. This means all custody cases are now governed by this new bill. The revised public policy ensures that physical and emotional protection and welfare are paramount concerns. Parents are encouraged to “share the rights and responsibilities of child rearing…to effectuate the protection and welfare of minor children.” Perhaps more importantly, public policy now states “that the expressed preferences of the child are considered…judicial decisions regarding custody of, and access to, children shall promote the safety of children as a threshold issue.”
This “child preference” piece of the law has gained a lot of attention from divorce lawyers in New Jersey because of how it appears to elevate a child’s voice in contested custody litigation. However, nothing appears to have changed with parties have agreed to a custody arrangement; the law remains that “[t]he court shall order any custody arrangement which is agreed to by both parties unless it is contrary to the best interests of the child.”
From a practical standpoint, when parents do not agree, the child’s voice is coming in to play a much stronger role now than ever before. This means, “…if the court orders any custody arrangement contrary to the expressed preferences of the child, the court shall specifically place on the record the factors which justify the arrangement and which just the court’s decision to disregard the child’s expressed preferences.”
In another section of the law, concerning therapy for minor children, language is included stating that “a child deemed to be of sufficient age and expressing a desire to speak to the court shall be granted an audience off the record and in private chambers.” In legal terms, the word “shall” means that the court must do it and has no discretion. While the language includes the phrase “of sufficient age”, that term is not defined by law. This will undoubtedly be decided on a judge-by-judge basis, with rulings varying from courtroom to courtroom throughout New Jersey.
For parents who are divorcing and cannot reach a custody agreement, this new provision will essentially force your children to choose between you or your spouse. This is an awful burden to put on a child.
A second piece of the law concerning therapy has drawn immense scrutiny, as it appears that therapy, unless agreed to by both parents, is not something that a court can liberally grant any further.
First, the legislature has decided that “any court-ordered therapy or treatment should be scientifically valid and have generally accepted proof of effectiveness and therapeutic value…”
The law further states that “the court shall not order any therapy unless there is generally accepted and scientifically valid proof of the safety, effectiveness, and therapeutic value of the therapy.” The court now requires a showing of “good cause” prior to ordering such therapy. No treatment program intended to reunite a child with an estranged party shall be ordered without the consent of both parties and a determination that the child is of sufficient age.
Once therapy has been determined as appropriate and ordered, there are now requirements for the appointed therapist. They must be state-licensed and meet specific training requirements if there is evidence of domestic violence or child abuse. They must also report to the court periodically regarding the progress of therapy and the participants’ willingness to engage.
Additionally, children of sufficient age can request to report their own experiences in therapy, which the court can then use to modify, suspend, or stop the treatment
Somewhat buried in this section is a provision stating that “the court shall not presume that a child’s reluctance to interact with a party was caused by the other party.” When there is a history of domestic violence or child abuse, the offending party shall not be granted increased custody solely to “improve the relationship” or address the child’s reluctance to interact.
The application of this new law will unfold in our courts very soon and in unknown ways. In the less disputed cases, I expect the pressure increases to reach a resolution, giving more equal parenting time to both parents and somewhat of a departure from every other weekend scenarios, as parents weigh the risk of having their child “pick sides” especially with the court being told to encourage parents to “share the rights and responsibilities of child rearing…”
In more disputed cases, it becomes very difficult for a court not to interview a child and to give far greater weight to their expressed desires. I also expect those true alienation cases to be far harder to undo when they are not addressed quickly in the early stages of a divorce. Furthermore, I think that once a parent-child relationship sours, the soured upon parent is going to find very little friends in the court system to help solve the problem. This also poses the question of whether this law revokes an alienated parent’s Constitutional rights? Time will tell how this unfolds, but from a divorce attorney’s perspective this has the likelihood of being disastrous.
The landscape of New Jersey custody law has shifted overnight, placing an unprecedented weight on the “child’s voice” and fundamentally altering how therapy and reunification are handled. In this new era, the strategy you choose at the outset of your case is more critical than ever to avoid a “disastrous” outcome for your family dynamic. Do not navigate these unrecognizable statutes alone or wait for the courts to define your rights through trial and error. Reach out to Rozin | Golinder Law to speak with our experienced divorce and child custody lawyers today. We want to make sure your relationship with your child is protected under these new standards.
