After years of trying and failing to land the same plane, New Hampshire lawmakers have finally moved a bill that creates a criminal penalty for knowingly filing false reports of child abuse or neglect with the state’s Division for Children, Youth and Families. The state Senate passed House Bill 1565 on Thursday and sent it to Gov. Kelly Ayotte for final approval, according to the New Hampshire Bulletin. The legislation now heads back to the House for concurrence on Senate amendments before the governor can sign it.
The core of HB 1565 is straightforward. If signed into law, it would make it a misdemeanor to knowingly provide false information about suspected child abuse or neglect to DCYF. The bill targets people who weaponize the child-protection system, not those who report in good faith and turn out to be wrong. Backers, including longtime Senate Republican Regina Birdsell, have argued that the system has become a tool for personal grudges and custody warfare, with each false report consuming hours of investigator time, intruding on innocent families and traumatizing the very children the law is meant to protect.
“We’ve got a problem with people weaponizing the system,” supporters argued during floor debate. “These complaints are not just an inconvenience. They trigger investigations, house intrusion, more emotional trauma for the children and for the families.”
The bill cleared the Senate Health and Human Services Committee 3-0 with an “ought to pass” recommendation on May 14 before moving to the full Senate calendar for Thursday’s vote. That unusually clean committee record helps explain why a measure that has died repeatedly in past sessions finally made it through.
This is the third recent attempt by Concord to put a real consequence on knowingly false DCYF reports. In 2024, an early version of the proposal cleared the House but stalled in the Senate after critics raised concerns about chilling good-faith mandatory reporters. In 2025, House Bill 243 passed both chambers but in different forms, and lawmakers ran out of legislative runway to reconcile the two versions before the session ended. HB 1565, sponsored in the House and shepherded through the Senate by Birdsell, was drafted to avoid the technical drafting fight that killed HB 243. It threads the needle by requiring the state to prove a reporter knowingly provided false information, a higher bar than negligence or honest mistake.
There is one wrinkle in the Senate version that gives the House something to chew on before it heads to the governor. Before sending the bill across the rotunda, senators attached two unrelated provisions that have nothing to do with DCYF investigations. The first speeds up the application process for Medicaid nursing facilities, an industry that has been pushing hard for a more responsive state turnaround on licensure paperwork. The second requires school districts to engage a project manager before applying for state school-building aid, a procedural step backers say will reduce cost overruns on publicly funded construction projects. Adding unrelated riders to a final-week bill is a familiar end-of-session trick in Concord, and it ensures HB 1565 will have to clear the House one more time before it lands on Ayotte’s desk. Lawmakers there can concur with the Senate amendments, reject the bill outright or push for a committee of conference to negotiate a compromise.
The political backdrop here is more interesting than the procedural maneuver. DCYF has spent the better part of a decade rebuilding itself after the Sununu Youth Services Center scandal and the cascading civil and criminal cases that followed. The state has paid hundreds of millions of dollars in abuse settlements, the youth center is in the middle of a court-ordered replacement plan, and Ayotte herself, as a former attorney general, has staked political capital on the broader child-protection portfolio. A bill that strengthens DCYF’s ability to focus its limited investigator time on real abuse, rather than tactical complaints filed in the middle of a custody fight, fits cleanly into that narrative.
Critics, including some defense attorneys and advocates for survivors of domestic violence, have urged caution. The worry is that a criminal penalty for false reports, however narrowly written, will discourage parents, teachers and neighbors from ever calling in a borderline case. Mandatory reporters, including teachers, doctors, social workers and clergy, already operate under a state law that requires them to report any suspicion of abuse and neglect. Layering a misdemeanor penalty on top of that, even one limited to knowingly false reports, may give mandatory reporters one more reason to second-guess a call to DCYF. Birdsell and other supporters have repeatedly emphasized that the bar in the bill is intent, not accuracy, and that good-faith reports are explicitly protected.
For Granite Staters who interact with DCYF in any way, the practical implications of HB 1565 are worth understanding. If signed by the governor, the law will apply only to reports made after its effective date, which is typically July 1 unless the bill specifies otherwise. Prosecutors would need to prove that a person knowingly provided false information, meaning a parent who reported a babysitter in a panic and was wrong would not be in legal jeopardy. A divorcing spouse who manufactured a false bruise story to influence a custody hearing, on the other hand, would be exposed to a misdemeanor charge that could carry jail time, a fine and a criminal record.
The bill also intersects with two other reform efforts already underway in Concord. Lawmakers continue to push on the structural side of DCYF reform, including reviewing the state’s Office of the Child Advocate and tightening procedures inside the Sununu Youth Services Center, where staffing shortages and assaults remain a serious concern. The civil-justice side has moved separately. Earlier this term, the New Hampshire Supreme Court reshaped the legal landscape for how municipal police and other state agents can be sued for failing to act on suspected abuse, and the legislature has been working on parallel statutory updates. For background on those parallel fights, see our coverage of the New Hampshire Supreme Court’s New Boston decision on police liability in a child-abuse case, the debate over Sununu Center staffing and the lockdown after assaults on staff, and the recent fight over the state’s child advocate office.
If Ayotte signs HB 1565 into law, New Hampshire will join a small but growing group of states that put a criminal penalty on knowingly false child-abuse reports. Backers expect that the in-terrorem effect of the misdemeanor charge, rather than a wave of new prosecutions, will be the real value of the law. Even a handful of high-profile charges, supporters argue, could change the calculus for the relatively small population of bad actors who currently use the DCYF complaint line as a litigation strategy.
For everyone else, including the teachers, doctors and family members who currently account for the overwhelming majority of legitimate DCYF reports, very little changes. The state’s mandatory reporter framework remains intact. The DCYF intake line remains the right place to call when something is wrong. What changes is that the cost of a knowingly false call becomes a real one, and that could free up investigator time for the children who actually need protection. The House is expected to take up the Senate-amended version of HB 1565 in the next several legislative days, and the governor’s office has not signaled any intention to veto.
For related coverage, see our reporting on New Hampshire Raises Anonymous Campaign Donation Cap to $200 as Ayotte Signs ….
For related coverage, see our reporting on Who Gets the Money When the Sununu Center Sells? Lawmakers Strike a Deal.
What does HB 1565 actually criminalize?
HB 1565 makes it a misdemeanor to knowingly provide false information about suspected child abuse or neglect to the Division for Children, Youth and Families. Good-faith reports that turn out to be wrong are not covered, and prosecutors would need to prove the reporter knew the information was false.
Has Gov. Kelly Ayotte signed the bill yet?
Not yet. The Senate passed HB 1565 on Thursday, May 15, 2026, and the House must concur with Senate amendments before the bill can reach the governor’s desk. Ayotte has not publicly signaled an intent to veto, and her background as a former state attorney general aligns with the bill’s child-protection focus.
Why did senators attach unrelated provisions to the bill?
Senators added two riders before passing HB 1565: one to speed up Medicaid nursing-facility license processing, and one to require school districts to hire a project manager before applying for state school-building aid. Adding unrelated provisions in the final weeks of a session is a common Concord tactic to move several smaller items in one vehicle.
Will the bill discourage legitimate reports to DCYF?
Sponsors say no, because the criminal penalty applies only to knowingly false statements. Critics, including some defense attorneys and domestic-violence advocates, worry that any new penalty could chill borderline good-faith reports. Mandatory reporters such as teachers and doctors remain legally required to call in suspected abuse and remain protected when they do so in good faith.
When would the new law take effect?
If Ayotte signs the final version, the law would typically take effect on July 1, 2026, the start of the new state fiscal year, unless the final text specifies a different date. It would apply only to reports made after the effective date.
