Most Americans assume that if a parent has a documented history of domestic violence, stalking, coercive control, suicidal threats, child abuse or sexual abuse, a family court would never order a child into that parent's unsupervised care.
It seems like common sense.
It also isn't always true.
That gap between what people believe happens in court and what can actually happen in family courts has cost children their lives.
One of those children was Kyra Franchetti.
Her story inspired legislation known as Kyra's Law... a law that deserves to exist in every state.
Who Was Kyra?
Kyra Franchetti was a bright, joyful two-year-old little girl whose mother, Jacqueline Franchetti, repeatedly warned the family court that Kyra's father displayed dangerous behaviors, including domestic violence, stalking, threats, and signs of instability. Despite those warnings, the court approved unsupervised visitation.
In July 2016, during one of those court-approved visits, Kyra's father shot her while she slept before taking his own life.
It was a tragedy that many believe was preventable.
Instead of allowing unimaginable grief to become the end of her story, Jacqueline turned it into a mission to protect other children.
That mission became Kyra's Law.
What Is Kyra's Law?
While versions differ by state, the core purpose of Kyra's Law is simple:
Child safety must come before parental access.
The legislation requires courts to take allegations and evidence of domestic violence, child abuse, stalking, coercive control, and other serious safety risks into meaningful consideration when making custody and visitation decisions. It also seeks to improve judicial training on family violence and requires courts to explain how safety concerns were evaluated in these decisions.
That sounds obvious.
Which leads to one of the biggest misconceptions in family court.
Wait... Isn't This Already Happening?
Most people assume it is.
If you asked ten people on the street whether judges consider documented domestic violence before ordering custody or visitation, nearly all of them would probably say yes.
Many would be shocked to learn that family courts often prioritize maintaining a child's relationship with both parents, even when there are credible allegations of abuse. The way courts evaluate those allegations varies significantly by jurisdiction, judge, available evidence, and applicable law.
That's why legislation like Kyra's Law matters.
It creates clearer standards and places child safety where it belongs... at the center of custody decisions.
Why This Matters So Much in Narcissistic Abuse Cases
Narcissistic abuse doesn't always leave bruises.
It leaves confusion. Fear. Coercive control. Psychological manipulation.
Victims often spend years documenting patterns of behavior that outsiders dismiss because there isn't a single dramatic event.
By the time custody begins, the abusive parent may appear charming, calm, and cooperative.
The protective parent often appears anxious, emotional, or exhausted.
Without specialized understanding of coercive control and family violence dynamics, those appearances can be dangerously misleading.
That's one reason advocates argue that judges and court professionals need better training in recognizing abuse patterns beyond physical violence.
The Damage of Assuming the System Already Works
Perhaps the greatest harm isn't just what happens inside the courtroom.
It's what happens outside of it.
Friends say:
"The judge will protect the kids."
Family members say:
"If it were really dangerous, the court wouldn't allow it."
Therapists sometimes assume:
"Surely someone has already investigated this."
But when everyone believes someone else is protecting the child...
Sometimes no one is.
That false confidence can silence victims, discourage advocacy, and create the illusion that family courts have safeguards that may not consistently exist.
Families often discover the gaps only after irreversible harm has occurred.
Kyra Shouldn't Have Had to Become a Law
Every law named after a child tells the same heartbreaking story.
Someone had to die before the system changed.
No parent wants legislation named after their child.
They want their child.
Jacqueline Franchetti has spent years ensuring Kyra's life... and death... serve a greater purpose by pushing for reforms designed to prevent similar tragedies.
This Isn't About Punishing Parents
Some critics mistakenly assume laws like this are designed to keep children away from one parent.
They aren't.
They're about ensuring courts have the tools, training, and legal framework to make better-informed decisions when credible safety concerns exist.
Most custody cases involve parents who, despite conflict, love their children.
Kyra's Law addresses the smaller... but critically important... number of cases where warning signs point to genuine danger.
Those are the cases where mistakes can be fatal.
Why Every State Should Pass Kyra's Law
Children shouldn't have different levels of protection simply because they live in different states.
A child's safety shouldn't depend on which judge hears the case. Or whether that judge has specialized training in domestic violence. Or whether coercive control is fully understood.
Children deserve consistent protections.
Parents deserve confidence that credible evidence of abuse will be carefully evaluated.
And judges deserve clear guidance that recognizes what decades of domestic violence research has shown:
The greatest danger often isn't after abuse has ended.
It's when the victim tries to leave.
Kyra's Law isn't about politics. It's about prevention.
It's about recognizing that family violence doesn't end when a relationship ends.
It often escalates.
It's about replacing assumptions with informed decision-making.
And it's about making sure that when a parent says, "I'm afraid for my child," those words trigger careful evaluation... not dismissal.
No law can bring Kyra back.
But laws can save the next child.
If we are willing to learn from what happened, then Kyra's legacy becomes more than a tragedy. It becomes a promise that children will be seen, heard, and protected before it's too late.
