Participants are not the target

In Palmer v. State (1979), the Alaska Supreme Court looked at a recording made by one of the participants.

It said the eavesdropping statute "is clearly intended to prohibit third-party eavesdropping". So it was not applicable where "one of the participants recorded the conversation". A parent recording their own call is a participant.

What the statute covers

AS 42.20.310 bars using an electronic device to hear or record a private conversation without the consent of a party.

It also bars using or disclosing information obtained that way. A violation is a misdemeanor, with up to a year in jail. The Reporters Committee notes fines of up to $25,000.

Where the risk sits

Palmer protects participants. It gives nothing to a parent who records other people.

A recorder left in the other parent's home, or spyware on their phone, is third-party eavesdropping. That is exactly what the statute is aimed at. Federal law may apply too, and federal interception is a felony.

Disclosure

Alaska's law also covers using or disclosing information from an unlawful recording. Playing it to relatives, or posting it online, adds to the problem.

If you have a recording of other people, keep it to yourself and ask a lawyer first. Sharing it is rarely the right next step.

Your child's calls

A call between your child and the other parent is one you are not part of. Under Palmer's reasoning, you would be a third party to it.

Some courts let a parent consent for a young child under Pollock v. Pollock. That needs a genuine, reasonable belief that recording is necessary for the child's welfare. Alaska has not clearly settled this, so take advice first.

Long-distance parenting

Many Alaska families co-parent across long distances, with video calls doing much of the work. Those calls are easy to record.

If you are on the call, Palmer's reasoning covers you. If the call is between your child and the other parent, and you are listening from another room, it does not.

What an Alaska court is weighing

Alaska decides custody on the child's best interests. The factors include each parent's willingness to allow a close relationship with the other parent.

A lawful recording can still count against you there. A clear written record makes the same point without that risk.

What to keep instead

Write events down the same day, with the clock time, the words in quotation marks and who was present.

A call log for custody records keeps calls and video calls in order. A factual incident report covers single events. Take both to an Alaska family lawyer.

An Alaska custody note for calls across the distance

Much Alaska co-parenting happens by phone and video. A written note captures what matters. Write it the same day.

Keep the Alaska record that bridges the distance

Casewell keeps your dated entries, the words you heard and the files behind them in one private place. A note written on the day is stronger than a memory rebuilt later. Export a focused PDF for an Alaska lawyer.

Download on the App Store Get Casewell on Google Play
Is Alaska a one-party consent state?

Yes. AS 42.20.310 needs a party's consent, and Palmer v. State held the statute targets third-party eavesdropping, not participants.

Can I record a video call with my child's other parent in Alaska?

If you are on the call, Palmer's reasoning covers you. A call between your child and the other parent is different, because you are a third party to it.

What is the penalty for eavesdropping in Alaska?

Violating AS 42.20.310 is a misdemeanor, with up to a year in jail. Federal law may also apply.

Can I share a recording of my ex in Alaska?

Using or disclosing information obtained by unlawful eavesdropping is also an offense. Speak to a lawyer before anyone hears it.

Can I record my child's calls with their other parent in Alaska?

That is a conversation you are not part of. Vicarious consent is not clearly settled in Alaska, so take advice first.

Sources

This page describes Alaska Statutes 42.20.310 and the Alaska Supreme Court decision in Palmer v. State. It explains the law and is not legal advice.