AB 1702: Juveniles: dependent children: reunification services.
- Session Year: 2015-2016
- House: Assembly
- Latest Version Date: 2016-08-17
Existing law establishes the jurisdiction of the juvenile court, which may adjudge children to be dependents of the court under certain circumstances, including when the child suffered or there is a substantial risk that the child will suffer serious physical harm, or a parent fails to provide the child with adequate food, clothing, shelter, or medical treatment. Existing law establishes the grounds for removal of a dependent child from the custody of his or her parents or guardian, and establishes procedures to determine temporary placement of a dependent child. Existing law generally requires the court to order the social worker to provide designated child welfare services, including family reunification services, to the child and the childs mother and statutorily presumed father or guardians. Existing law provides that reunification services need not be provided to a parent or guardian when the court finds, by clear and convincing evidence, that a specified event has occurred, including that the child has been adjudicated a dependent as a result of severe sexual abuse or the infliction of severe physical harm to the child, a sibling, or a half sibling by a parent or guardian, and the court makes a factual finding that it would not benefit the child to pursue reunification services with the offending parent or guardian.
This bill would also provide that reunification services need not be provided when the court finds that the parent or guardian knowingly participated in, or permitted, the sexual exploitation of the child, as prescribed, except if the parent or guardian demonstrated by a preponderance of the evidence that he or she was coerced into permitting, or participating in, the sexual exploitation of the child.
Existing law requires the court, if it does not order reunification services pursuant to specified provisions, to determine at the dispositional hearing if a hearing shall be set in order to determine the most appropriate plan for the child.
This bill would require the court to make that determination if it does not order reunification services because it found that the parent or guardian knowingly participated in, or permitted, the sexual exploitation of the child, as prescribed.
Existing law establishes the jurisdiction of the juvenile court, which may adjudge children to be dependents of the court under certain circumstances, including when the child suffered or there is a substantial risk that the child will suffer serious physical harm, or a parent fails to provide the child with adequate food, clothing, shelter, or medical treatment. Existing law establishes the grounds for removal of a dependent child from the custody of his or her parents or guardian, and establishes procedures to determine temporary placement of a dependent child. Existing law generally requires the court to order the social worker to provide designated child welfare services, including family reunification services, to the child and the childs mother and statutorily presumed father or guardians. Existing law provides that reunification services need not be provided to a parent or guardian when the court finds, by clear and convincing evidence, that a specified event has occurred, including that the child has been adjudicated a dependent as a result of severe sexual abuse or the infliction of severe physical harm to the child, a sibling, or a half sibling by a parent or guardian, and the court makes a factual finding that it would not benefit the child to pursue reunification services with the offending parent or guardian.
This bill would also provide that reunification services need not be provided when the court finds that the parent or guardian knowingly participated in, or permitted, the sexual exploitation of the child, as prescribed, except if the parent or guardian demonstrated by a preponderance of the evidence that he or she was coerced into permitting, or participating in, the sexual exploitation of the child.
Existing law requires the court, if it does not order reunification services pursuant to specified provisions, to determine at the dispositional hearing if a hearing shall be set in order to determine the most appropriate plan for the child.
This bill would require the court to make that determination if it does not order reunification services because it found that the parent or guardian knowingly participated in, or permitted, the sexual exploitation of the child, as prescribed.
Existing law establishes the jurisdiction of the juvenile court, which may adjudge children to be dependents of the court under certain circumstances, including when the child suffered or there is a substantial risk that the child will suffer serious physical harm, or a parent fails to provide the child with adequate food, clothing, shelter, or medical treatment. Existing law establishes the grounds for removal of a dependent child from the custody of his or her parents or guardian, and establishes procedures to determine temporary placement of a dependent child. Existing law generally requires the court to order the social worker to provide designated child welfare services, including family reunification services, to the child and the childs mother and statutorily presumed father or guardians. Existing law provides that reunification services need not be provided to a parent or guardian when the court finds, by clear and convincing evidence, that a specified event has occurred, including that the child has been adjudicated a dependent as a result of severe sexual abuse or the infliction of severe physical harm to the child, a sibling, or a half sibling by a parent or guardian, and the court makes a factual finding that it would not benefit the child to pursue reunification services with the offending parent or guardian.
This bill would also provide that reunification services need not be provided when the court finds that the parent or guardian knowingly participated in, or consented to permitted, the sexual exploitation of the child, as prescribed, except if the parent or guardian demonstrated by a preponderance of the evidence that he or she was coerced into consenting to, permitting, or participating in, the sexual exploitation of the child.
Existing law requires the court, if it does not order reunification services pursuant to specified provisions, to determine at the dispositional hearing if a hearing shall be set in order to determine the most appropriate plan for the child.
This bill would require the court to make that determination if it does not order reunification services because it found that the parent or guardian knowingly participated in, or consented to, permitted, the sexual exploitation of the child. child, as prescribed.
Existing law establishes the jurisdiction of the juvenile court, which may adjudge children to be dependents of the court under certain circumstances, including when the child suffered or there is a substantial risk that the child will suffer serious physical harm, or a parent fails to provide the child with adequate food, clothing, shelter, or medical treatment. Existing law establishes the grounds for removal of a dependent child from the custody of his or her parents or guardian, and establishes procedures to determine temporary placement of a dependent child. Existing law generally requires the court to order the social worker to provide designated child welfare services, including family reunification services, to the child and the childs mother and statutorily presumed father or guardians. Existing law provides that reunification services need not be provided to a parent or guardian when the court finds, by clear and convincing evidence, that a specified event has occurred, including that the child has been adjudicated a dependent as a result of severe sexual abuse or the infliction of severe physical harm to the child, a sibling, or a half sibling by a parent or guardian, and the court makes a factual finding that it would not benefit the child to pursue reunification services with the offending parent or guardian.
This bill would also provide that reunification services need not be provided when the court finds that the parent or guardian participated in, or consented to, the sexual exploitation of the child, as prescribed, except if the parent or guardian was coerced into consenting to, or participating in, the sexual exploitation of the child.
Existing law requires the court, if it does not order reunification services pursuant to specified provisions, to determine at the dispositional hearing if a hearing shall be set in order to determine the most appropriate plan for the child.
This bill would require the court to make that determination if it does not order reunification services because it found that the parent or guardian participated in, or consented to, the sexual exploitation or human trafficking of the child.
Existing law establishes the jurisdiction of the juvenile court, which may adjudge children to be dependents of the court under certain circumstances, including when the child suffered or there is a substantial risk that the child will suffer serious physical harm, or a parent fails to provide the child with adequate food, clothing, shelter, or medical treatment. Existing law establishes the grounds for removal of a dependent child from the custody of his or her parents or guardian, and establishes procedures to determine temporary placement of a dependent child. Existing law generally requires the court to order the social worker to provide designated child welfare services, including family reunification services, to the child and the childs mother and statutorily presumed father or guardians. Existing law provides that reunification services need not be provided to a parent or guardian when the court finds, by clear and convincing evidence, that a specified event has occurred, including that the child has been adjudicated a dependent as a result of severe sexual abuse or the infliction of severe physical harm to the child, a sibling, or a half sibling by a parent or guardian, and the court makes a factual finding that it would not benefit the child to pursue reunification services with the offending parent or guardian.
This bill would also provide that reunification services need not be provided when the court finds that the parent or guardian participated in, or consented to, the sexual exploitation or human trafficking of the child, except if the parent or guardian was also a victim of sexual exploitation or human trafficking and was coerced into consenting to, or participating in, the sexual exploitation or human trafficking of the child.
Existing law requires the court, if it does not order reunification services pursuant to specified provisions, to determine at the dispositional hearing if a hearing shall be set in order to determine the most appropriate plan for the child.
This bill would require the court to make that determine determination if it does not order reunification services because it found that the parent or guardian participated in, or consisted consented to, the sexual exploitation or human trafficking of the child.
Existing law establishes the jurisdiction of the juvenile court, which may adjudge children to be dependents of the court under certain circumstances, including when the child suffered or there is a substantial risk that the child will suffer serious physical harm, or a parent fails to provide the child with adequate food, clothing, shelter, or medical treatment. Existing law establishes the grounds for removal of a dependent child from the custody of his or her parents or guardian, and establishes procedures to determine temporary placement of a dependent child. Existing law generally requires the court to order the social worker to provide designated child welfare services, including family reunification services, to the child and the childs mother and statutorily presumed father or guardians. Existing law provides that reunification services need not be provided to a parent or guardian when the court finds, by clear and convincing evidence, that a specified event has occurred, including that the child has been adjudicated a dependent as a result of severe sexual abuse or the infliction of severe physical harm to the child, a sibling, or a half sibling by a parent or guardian, and the court makes a factual finding that it would not benefit the child to pursue reunification services with the offending parent or guardian.
This bill would also provide that reunification services need not be provided when the court finds that the parent or guardian participated in, or consented to, the sexual exploitation or human trafficking of the child, except if the parent or guardian was also a victim of sexual exploitation or human trafficking and was coerced into consenting to, or participating in, the sexual exploitation or human trafficking of the child.
Existing law requires the court, if it does not order reunification services pursuant to specified provisions, to determine at the dispositional hearing if a hearing shall be set in order to determine the most appropriate plan for the child.
This bill would require the court to make that determine if it does not order reunification services because it found that the parent or guardian participated in, or consisted to, the sexual exploitation or human trafficking of the child.
(a)Except as provided in subdivision (b), or when the parent has voluntarily relinquished the child and the relinquishment has been filed with the State Department of Social Services, or upon the establishment of an order of guardianship pursuant to Section 360, or when a court adjudicates a petition under Section 329 to modify the courts jurisdiction from delinquency jurisdiction to dependency jurisdiction pursuant to subparagraph (A) of paragraph (2) of subdivision (b) of Section 607.2 and the parents or guardian of the ward have had reunification services terminated under the delinquency jurisdiction, whenever a child is removed from a parents or guardians custody, the juvenile court shall order the social worker to provide child welfare services to the child and the childs mother and statutorily presumed father or guardians. Upon a finding and declaration of paternity by the juvenile court or proof of a prior declaration of paternity by any court of competent jurisdiction, the juvenile court may order services for the child and the biological father, if the court determines that the services will benefit the child.
(1)Family reunification services, when provided, shall be provided as follows:
(A)Except as otherwise provided in subparagraph (C), for a child who, on the date of initial removal from the physical custody of his or her parent or guardian, was three years of age or older, court-ordered services shall be provided beginning with the dispositional hearing and ending 12 months after the date the child entered foster care as provided in Section 361.49, unless the child is returned to the home of the parent or guardian.
(B)For a child who, on the date of initial removal from the physical custody of his or her parent or guardian, was under three years of age, court-ordered services shall be provided for a period of six months from the dispositional hearing as provided in subdivision (e) of Section 366.21, but no longer than 12 months from the date the child entered foster care, as provided in Section 361.49, unless the child is returned to the home of the parent or guardian.
(C)For the purpose of placing and maintaining a sibling group together in a permanent home should reunification efforts fail, for a child in a sibling group whose members were removed from parental custody at the same time, and in which one member of the sibling group was under three years of age on the date of initial removal from the physical custody of his or her parent or guardian, court-ordered services for some or all of the sibling group may be limited as set forth in subparagraph (B). For the purposes of this paragraph, a sibling group shall mean two or more children who are related to each other as full or half siblings.
(2)Any motion to terminate court-ordered reunification services prior to the hearing set pursuant to subdivision (f) of Section 366.21 for a child described by subparagraph (A) of paragraph (1), or prior to the hearing set pursuant to subdivision (e) of Section 366.21 for a child described by subparagraph (B) or (C) of paragraph (1), shall be made pursuant to the requirements set forth in subdivision (c) of Section 388. A motion to terminate court-ordered reunification services shall not be required at the hearing set pursuant to subdivision (e) of Section 366.21 if the court finds by clear and convincing evidence one of the following:
(A)That the child was removed initially under subdivision (g) of Section 300 and the whereabouts of the parent are still unknown.
(B)That the parent has failed to contact and visit the child.
(C)That the parent has been convicted of a felony indicating parental unfitness.
(3)(A)Notwithstanding subparagraphs (A), (B), and (C) of paragraph (1), court-ordered services may be extended up to a maximum time period not to exceed 18 months after the date the child was originally removed from physical custody of his or her parent or guardian if it can be shown, at the hearing held pursuant to subdivision (f) of Section 366.21, that the permanent plan for the child is that he or she will be returned and safely maintained in the home within the extended time period. The court shall extend the time period only if it finds that there is a substantial probability that the child will be returned to the physical custody of his or her parent or guardian within the extended time period or that reasonable services have not been provided to the parent or guardian. In determining whether court-ordered services may be extended, the court shall consider the special circumstances of an incarcerated or institutionalized parent or parents, parent or parents court-ordered to a residential substance abuse treatment program, or a parent who has been arrested and issued an immigration hold, detained by the United States Department of Homeland Security, or deported to his or her country of origin, including, but not limited to, barriers to the parents or guardians access to services and ability to maintain contact with his or her child. The court shall also consider, among other factors, good faith efforts that the parent or guardian has made to maintain contact with the child. If the court extends the time period, the court shall specify the factual basis for its conclusion that there is a substantial probability that the child will be returned to the physical custody of his or her parent or guardian within the extended time period. The court also shall make findings pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 366 and subdivision (e) of Section 358.1.
(B)When counseling or other treatment services are ordered, the parent or guardian shall be ordered to participate in those services, unless the parents or guardians participation is deemed by the court to be inappropriate or potentially detrimental to the child, or unless a parent or guardian is incarcerated or detained by the United States Department of Homeland Security and the corrections facility in which he or she is incarcerated does not provide access to the treatment services ordered by the court, or has been deported to his or her country of origin and services ordered by the court are not accessible in that country. Physical custody of the child by the parents or guardians during the applicable time period under subparagraph (A), (B), or (C) of paragraph (1) shall not serve to interrupt the running of the time period. If at the end of the applicable time period, a child cannot be safely returned to the care and custody of a parent or guardian without court supervision, but the child clearly desires contact with the parent or guardian, the court shall take the childs desire into account in devising a permanency plan.
(C)In cases where the child was under three years of age on the date of the initial removal from the physical custody of his or her parent or guardian or is a member of a sibling group as described in subparagraph (C) of paragraph (1), the court shall inform the parent or guardian that the failure of the parent or guardian to participate regularly in any court-ordered treatment programs or to cooperate or avail himself or herself of services provided as part of the child welfare services case plan may result in a termination of efforts to reunify the family after six months. The court shall inform the parent or guardian of the factors used in subdivision (e) of Section 366.21 to determine whether to limit services to six months for some or all members of a sibling group as described in subparagraph (C) of paragraph (1).
(4)(A)Notwithstanding paragraph (3), court-ordered services may be extended up to a maximum time period not to exceed 24 months after the date the child was originally removed from physical custody of his or her parent or guardian if it is shown, at the hearing held pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 366.22, that the permanent plan for the child is that he or she will be returned and safely maintained in the home within the extended time period. The court shall extend the time period only if it finds that it is in the childs best interest to have the time period extended and that there is a substantial probability that the child will be returned to the physical custody of his or her parent or guardian who is described in subdivision (b) of Section 366.22 within the extended time period, or that reasonable services have not been provided to the parent or guardian. If the court extends the time period, the court shall specify the factual basis for its conclusion that there is a substantial probability that the child will be returned to the physical custody of his or her parent or guardian within the extended time period. The court also shall make findings pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 366 and subdivision (e) of Section 358.1.
(B)When counseling or other treatment services are ordered, the parent or guardian shall be ordered to participate in those services, in order for substantial probability to be found. Physical custody of the child by the parents or guardians during the applicable time period under subparagraph (A), (B), or (C) of paragraph (1) shall not serve to interrupt the running of the time period. If at the end of the applicable time period, the child cannot be safely returned to the care and custody of a parent or guardian without court supervision, but the child clearly desires contact with the parent or guardian, the court shall take the childs desire into account in devising a permanency plan.
(C)Except in cases where, pursuant to subdivision (b), the court does not order reunification services, the court shall inform the parent or parents of Section 366.26 and shall specify that the parents or parents parental rights may be terminated.
(b)Reunification services need not be provided to a parent or guardian described in this subdivision when the court finds, by clear and convincing evidence, any of the following:
(1)That the whereabouts of the parent or guardian are unknown. A finding pursuant to this paragraph shall be supported by an affidavit or by proof that a reasonably diligent search has failed to locate the parent or guardian. The posting or publication of notices is not required in that search.
(2)That the parent or guardian is suffering from a mental disability that is described in Chapter 2 (commencing with Section 7820) of Part 4 of Division 12 of the Family Code and that renders him or her incapable of utilizing those services.
(3)That the child or a sibling of the child has been previously adjudicated a dependent pursuant to any subdivision of Section 300 as a result of physical or sexual abuse, that following that adjudication the child had been removed from the custody of his or her parent or guardian pursuant to Section 361, that the child has been returned to the custody of the parent or guardian from whom the child had been taken originally, and that the child is being removed pursuant to Section 361, due to additional physical or sexual abuse.
(4)That the parent or guardian of the child has caused the death of another child through abuse or neglect.
(5)That the child was brought within the jurisdiction of the court under subdivision (e) of Section 300 because of the conduct of that parent or guardian.
(6)(A)That the child has been adjudicated a dependent pursuant to any subdivision of Section 300 as a result of severe sexual abuse or the infliction of severe physical harm to the child, a sibling, or a half sibling by a parent or guardian, as defined in this subdivision, and the court makes a factual finding that it would not benefit the child to pursue reunification services with the offending parent or guardian.
(B)A finding of severe sexual abuse, for the purposes of this subdivision, may be based on, but is not limited to, sexual intercourse, or stimulation involving genital-genital, oral-genital, anal-genital, or oral-anal contact, whether between the parent or guardian and the child or a sibling or half sibling of the child, or between the child or a sibling or half sibling of the child and another person or animal with the actual or implied consent of the parent or guardian; or the penetration or manipulation of the childs, siblings, or half siblings genital organs or rectum by any animate or inanimate object for the sexual gratification of the parent or guardian, or for the sexual gratification of another person with the actual or implied consent of the parent or guardian.
(C)A finding of the infliction of severe physical harm, for the purposes of this subdivision, may be based on, but is not limited to, deliberate and serious injury inflicted to or on a childs body or the body of a sibling or half sibling of the child by an act or omission of the parent or guardian, or of another individual or animal with the consent of the parent or guardian; deliberate and torturous confinement of the child, sibling, or half sibling in a closed space; or any other torturous act or omission that would be reasonably understood to cause serious emotional damage.
(7)That the parent is not receiving reunification services for a sibling or a half sibling of the child pursuant to paragraph (3), (5), or (6).
(8)That the child was conceived by means of the commission of an offense listed in Section 288 or 288.5 of the Penal Code, or by an act committed outside of this state that, if committed in this state, would constitute one of those offenses. This paragraph only applies to the parent who committed the offense or act.
(9)That the child has been found to be a child described in subdivision (g) of Section 300; that the parent or guardian of the child willfully abandoned the child, and the court finds that the abandonment itself constituted a serious danger to the child; or that the parent or other person having custody of the child voluntarily surrendered physical custody of the child pursuant to Section 1255.7 of the Health and Safety Code. For the purposes of this paragraph, serious danger means that without the intervention of another person or agency, the child would have sustained severe or permanent disability, injury, illness, or death. For purposes of this paragraph, willful abandonment shall not be construed as actions taken in good faith by the parent without the intent of placing the child in serious danger.
(10)That the court ordered termination of reunification services for any siblings or half siblings of the child because the parent or guardian failed to reunify with the sibling or half sibling after the sibling or half sibling had been removed from that parent or guardian pursuant to Section 361 and that parent or guardian is the same parent or guardian described in subdivision (a) and that, according to the findings of the court, this parent or guardian has not subsequently made a reasonable effort to treat the problems that led to removal of the sibling or half sibling of that child from that parent or guardian.
(11)That the parental rights of a parent over any sibling or half sibling of the child had been permanently severed, and this parent is the same parent described in subdivision (a), and that, according to the findings of the court, this parent has not subsequently made a reasonable effort to treat the problems that led to removal of the sibling or half sibling of that child from the parent.
(12)That the parent or guardian of the child has been convicted of a violent felony, as defined in subdivision (c) of Section 667.5 of the Penal Code.
(13)That the parent or guardian of the child has a history of extensive, abusive, and chronic use of drugs or alcohol and has resisted prior court-ordered treatment for this problem during a three-year period immediately prior to the filing of the petition that brought that child to the courts attention, or has failed or refused to comply with a program of drug or alcohol treatment described in the case plan required by Section 358.1 on at least two prior occasions, even though the programs identified were available and accessible.
(14)(A)That the parent or guardian of the child has advised the court that he or she is not interested in receiving family maintenance or family reunification services or having the child returned to or placed in his or her custody and does not wish to receive family maintenance or reunification services.
(B)The parent or guardian shall be represented by counsel and shall execute a waiver of services form to be adopted by the Judicial Council. The court shall advise the parent or guardian of any right to services and of the possible consequences of a waiver of services, including the termination of parental rights and placement of the child for adoption. The court shall not accept the waiver of services unless it states on the record its finding that the parent or guardian has knowingly and intelligently waived the right to services.
(15)That the parent or guardian has on one or more occasions willfully abducted the child or childs sibling or half sibling from his or her placement and refused to disclose the childs or childs siblings or half siblings whereabouts, refused to return physical custody of the child or childs sibling or half sibling to his or her placement, or refused to return physical custody of the child or childs sibling or half sibling to the social worker.
(16)That the parent or guardian has been required by the court to be registered on a sex offender registry under the federal Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006 (42 U.S.C. Sec. 16913(a)), as required in Section 106(b)(2)(B)(xvi)(VI) of the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act of 2006 (42 U.S.C. Sec. 5106a(2)(B)(xvi)(VI)).
(17)That the parent or guardian knowingly participated in, or permitted, the sexual exploitation, as described in subdivision (c) or (d) of Section 11165.1 of, or subdivision (c) of Section 236.1 of, the Penal Code, of the child. This shall not include instances in which the parent or guardian demonstrated by a preponderance of the evidence that he or she was coerced into permitting, or participating in, the sexual exploitation of the child.
(c)(1)In deciding whether to order reunification in any case in which this section applies, the court shall hold a dispositional hearing. The social worker shall prepare a report that discusses whether reunification services shall be provided. When it is alleged, pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (b), that the parent is incapable of utilizing services due to mental disability, the court shall order reunification services unless competent evidence from mental health professionals establishes that, even with the provision of services, the parent is unlikely to be capable of adequately caring for the child within the time limits specified in subdivision (a).
(2)The court shall not order reunification for a parent or guardian described in paragraph (3), (4), (6), (7), (8), (9), (10), (11), (12), (13), (14), (15), (16), or (17) of subdivision (b) unless the court finds, by clear and convincing evidence, that reunification is in the best interest of the child.
(3)In addition, the court shall not order reunification in any situation described in paragraph (5) of subdivision (b) unless it finds that, based on competent testimony, those services are likely to prevent reabuse or continued neglect of the child or that failure to try reunification will be detrimental to the child because the child is closely and positively attached to that parent. The social worker shall investigate the circumstances leading to the removal of the child and advise the court whether there are circumstances that indicate that reunification is likely to be successful or unsuccessful and whether failure to order reunification is likely to be detrimental to the child.
(4)The failure of the parent to respond to previous services, the fact that the child was abused while the parent was under the influence of drugs or alcohol, a past history of violent behavior, or testimony by a competent professional that the parents behavior is unlikely to be changed by services are among the factors indicating that reunification services are unlikely to be successful. The fact that a parent or guardian is no longer living with an individual who severely abused the child may be considered in deciding that reunification services are likely to be successful, provided that the court shall consider any pattern of behavior on the part of the parent that has exposed the child to repeated abuse.
(d)If reunification services are not ordered pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (b) and the whereabouts of a parent become known within six months of the out-of-home placement of the child, the court shall order the social worker to provide family reunification services in accordance with this subdivision.
(e)(1)If the parent or guardian is incarcerated, institutionalized, or detained by the United States Department of Homeland Security, or has been deported to his or her country of origin, the court shall order reasonable services unless the court determines, by clear and convincing evidence, those services would be detrimental to the child. In determining detriment, the court shall consider the age of the child, the degree of parent-child bonding, the length of the sentence, the length and nature of the treatment, the nature of the crime or illness, the degree of detriment to the child if services are not offered and, for children 10 years of age or older, the childs attitude toward the implementation of family reunification services, the likelihood of the parents discharge from incarceration, institutionalization, or detention within the reunification time limitations described in subdivision (a), and any other appropriate factors. In determining the content of reasonable services, the court shall consider the particular barriers to an incarcerated, institutionalized, detained, or deported parents access to those court-mandated services and ability to maintain contact with his or her child, and shall document this information in the childs case plan. Reunification services are subject to the applicable time limitations imposed in subdivision (a). Services may include, but shall not be limited to, all of the following:
(A)Maintaining contact between the parent and child through collect telephone calls.
(B)Transportation services, where appropriate.
(C)Visitation services, where appropriate.
(D)(i)Reasonable services to extended family members or foster parents providing care for the child if the services are not detrimental to the child.
(ii)An incarcerated or detained parent may be required to attend counseling, parenting classes, or vocational training programs as part of the reunification service plan if actual access to these services is provided. The social worker shall document in the childs case plan the particular barriers to an incarcerated, institutionalized, or detained parents access to those court-mandated services and ability to maintain contact with his or her child.
(E)Reasonable efforts to assist parents who have been deported to contact child welfare authorities in their country of origin, to identify any available services that would substantially comply with case plan requirements, to document the parents participation in those services, and to accept reports from local child welfare authorities as to the parents living situation, progress, and participation in services.
(2)The presiding judge of the juvenile court of each county may convene representatives of the county welfare department, the sheriffs department, and other appropriate entities for the purpose of developing and entering into protocols for ensuring the notification, transportation, and presence of an incarcerated or institutionalized parent at all court hearings involving proceedings affecting the child pursuant to Section 2625 of the Penal Code. The county welfare department shall utilize the prisoner locator system developed by the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to facilitate timely and effective notice of hearings for incarcerated parents.
(3)Notwithstanding any other law, if the incarcerated parent is a woman seeking to participate in the community treatment program operated by the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation pursuant to Chapter 4.8 (commencing with Section 1174) of Title 7 of Part 2 of, or Chapter 4 (commencing with Section 3410) of Title 2 of Part 3 of, the Penal Code, the court shall determine whether the parents participation in a program is in the childs best interest and whether it is suitable to meet the needs of the parent and child.
(f)If the court, pursuant to paragraph (2), (3), (4), (5), (6), (7), (8), (9), (10), (11), (12), (13), (14), (15), (16), or (17) of subdivision (b) or paragraph (1) of subdivision (e), does not order reunification services, it shall, at the dispositional hearing, that shall include a permanency hearing, determine if a hearing under Section 366.26 shall be set in order to determine whether adoption, guardianship, or long-term foster care, or, in the case of an Indian child, in consultation with the childs tribe, tribal customary adoption, is the most appropriate plan for the child, and shall consider in-state and out-of-state placement options. If the court so determines, it shall conduct the hearing pursuant to Section 366.26 within 120 days after the dispositional hearing. However, the court shall not schedule a hearing so long as the other parent is being provided reunification services pursuant to subdivision (a). The court may continue to permit the parent to visit the child unless it finds that visitation would be detrimental to the child.
(g)(1)Whenever a court orders that a hearing shall be held pursuant to Section 366.26, including, when, in consultation with the childs tribe, tribal customary adoption is recommended, it shall direct the agency supervising the child and the county adoption agency, or the State Department of Social Services when it is acting as an adoption agency, to prepare an assessment that shall include:
(A)Current search efforts for an absent parent or parents and notification of a noncustodial parent in the manner provided for in Section 291.
(B)A review of the amount of and nature of any contact between the child and his or her parents and other members of his or her extended family since the time of placement. Although the extended family of each child shall be reviewed on a case-by-case basis, extended family for the purpose of this subparagraph shall include, but not be limited to, the childs siblings, grandparents, aunts, and uncles.
(C)An evaluation of the childs medical, developmental, scholastic, mental, and emotional status.
(D)A preliminary assessment of the eligibility and commitment of any identified prospective adoptive parent or guardian, including a prospective tribal customary adoptive parent, particularly the caretaker, to include a social history, including screening for criminal records and prior referrals for child abuse or neglect, the capability to meet the childs needs, and the understanding of the legal and financial rights and responsibilities of adoption and guardianship. If a proposed guardian is a relative of the minor, the assessment shall also consider, but need not be limited to, all of the factors specified in subdivision (a) of Section 361.3 and in Section 361.4. As used in this subparagraph, relative means an adult who is related to the minor by blood, adoption, or affinity within the fifth degree of kinship, including stepparents, stepsiblings, and all relatives whose status is preceded by the words great, great-great, or grand, or the spouse of any of those persons even if the marriage was terminated by death or dissolution. If the proposed permanent plan is guardianship with an approved relative caregiver for a minor eligible for aid under the Kin-GAP Program, as provided for in Article 4.7 (commencing with Section 11385) of Chapter 2 of Part 3 of Division 9, relative as used in this section has the same meaning as relative as defined in subdivision (c) of Section 11391.
(E)The relationship of the child to any identified prospective adoptive parent or guardian, including a prospective tribal customary parent, the duration and character of the relationship, the degree of attachment of the child to the prospective relative guardian or adoptive parent, the relatives or adoptive parents strong commitment to caring permanently for the child, the motivation for seeking adoption or guardianship, a statement from the child concerning placement and the adoption or guardianship, and whether the child over 12 years of age has been consulted about the proposed relative guardianship arrangements, unless the childs age or physical, emotional, or other condition precludes his or her meaningful response, and if so, a description of the condition.
(F)An analysis of the likelihood that the child will be adopted if parental rights are terminated.
(G)In the case of an Indian child, in addition to subparagraphs (A) to (F), inclusive, an assessment of the likelihood that the child will be adopted, when, in consultation with the childs tribe, a customary adoption, as defined in Section 366.24, is recommended. If tribal customary adoption is recommended, the assessment shall include an analysis of both of the following:
(i)Whether tribal customary adoption would or would not be detrimental to the Indian child and the reasons for reaching that conclusion.
(ii)Whether the Indian child cannot or should not be returned to the home of the Indian parent or Indian custodian and the reasons for reaching that conclusion.
(2)(A)A relative caregivers preference for legal guardianship over adoption, if it is due to circumstances that do not include an unwillingness to accept legal or financial responsibility for the child, shall not constitute the sole basis for recommending removal of the child from the relative caregiver for purposes of adoptive placement.
(B)Regardless of his or her immigration status, a relative caregiver shall be given information regarding the permanency options of guardianship and adoption, including the long-term benefits and consequences of each option, prior to establishing legal guardianship or pursuing adoption. If the proposed permanent plan is guardianship with an approved relative caregiver for a minor eligible for aid under the Kin-GAP Program, as provided for in Article 4.7 (commencing with Section 11385) of Chapter 2 of Part 3 of Division 9, the relative caregiver shall be informed about the terms and conditions of the negotiated agreement pursuant to Section 11387 and shall agree to its execution prior to the hearing held pursuant to Section 366.26. A copy of the executed negotiated agreement shall be attached to the assessment.
(h)If, at any hearing held pursuant to Section 366.26, a guardianship is established for the minor with an approved relative caregiver and juvenile court dependency is subsequently dismissed, the minor shall be eligible for aid under the Kin-GAP Program as provided for in Article 4.5 (commencing with Section 11360) or Article 4.7 (commencing with Section 11385), as applicable, of Chapter 2 of Part 3 of Division 9.
(i)In determining whether reunification services will benefit the child pursuant to paragraph (6) or (7) of subdivision (b), the court shall consider any information it deems relevant, including the following factors:
(1)The specific act or omission comprising the severe sexual abuse or the severe physical harm inflicted on the child or the childs sibling or half sibling.
(2)The circumstances under which the abuse or harm was inflicted on the child or the childs sibling or half sibling.
(3)The severity of the emotional trauma suffered by the child or the childs sibling or half sibling.
(4)Any history of abuse of other children by the offending parent or guardian.
(5)The likelihood that the child may be safely returned to the care of the offending parent or guardian within 12 months with no continuing supervision.
(6)Whether or not the child desires to be reunified with the offending parent or guardian.
(j)When the court determines that reunification services will not be ordered, it shall order that the childs caregiver receive the childs birth certificate in accordance with Sections 16010.4 and 16010.5. Additionally, when the court determines that reunification services will not be ordered, it shall order, when appropriate, that a child who is 16 years of age or older receive his or her birth certificate.
(k)The court shall read into the record the basis for a finding of severe sexual abuse or the infliction of severe physical harm under paragraph (6) of subdivision (b), and shall also specify the factual findings used to determine that the provision of reunification services to the offending parent or guardian would not benefit the child.
(a)Except as provided in subdivision (b), or when the parent has voluntarily relinquished the child and the relinquishment has been filed with the State Department of Social Services, or upon the establishment of an order of guardianship pursuant to Section 360, or when a court adjudicates a petition under Section 329 to modify the courts jurisdiction from delinquency jurisdiction to dependency jurisdiction pursuant to subparagraph (A) of paragraph (2) of subdivision (b) of Section 607.2 and the parents or guardian of the ward have had reunification services terminated under the delinquency jurisdiction, whenever a child is removed from a parents or guardians custody, the juvenile court shall order the social worker to provide child welfare services to the child and the childs mother and statutorily presumed father or guardians. Upon a finding and declaration of paternity by the juvenile court or proof of a prior declaration of paternity by any court of competent jurisdiction, the juvenile court may order services for the child and the biological father, if the court determines that the services will benefit the child.
(1)Family reunification services, when provided, shall be provided as follows:
(A)Except as otherwise provided in subparagraph (C), for a child who, on the date of initial removal from the physical custody of his or her parent or guardian, was three years of age or older, court-ordered services shall be provided beginning with the dispositional hearing and ending 12 months after the date the child entered foster care as provided in Section 361.49, unless the child is returned to the home of the parent or guardian.
(B)For a child who, on the date of initial removal from the physical custody of his or her parent or guardian, was under three years of age, court-ordered services shall be provided for a period of six months from the dispositional hearing as provided in subdivision (e) of Section 366.21, but no longer than 12 months from the date the child entered foster care, as provided in Section 361.49, unless the child is returned to the home of the parent or guardian.
(C)For the purpose of placing and maintaining a sibling group together in a permanent home should reunification efforts fail, for a child in a sibling group whose members were removed from parental custody at the same time, and in which one member of the sibling group was under three years of age on the date of initial removal from the physical custody of his or her parent or guardian, court-ordered services for some or all of the sibling group may be limited as set forth in subparagraph (B). For the purposes of this paragraph, a sibling group shall mean two or more children who are related to each other as full or half siblings.
(2)Any motion to terminate court-ordered reunification services prior to the hearing set pursuant to subdivision (f) of Section 366.21 for a child described by subparagraph (A) of paragraph (1), or prior to the hearing set pursuant to subdivision (e) of Section 366.21 for a child described by subparagraph (B) or (C) of paragraph (1), shall be made pursuant to the requirements set forth in subdivision (c) of Section 388. A motion to terminate court-ordered reunification services shall not be required at the hearing set pursuant to subdivision (e) of Section 366.21 if the court finds by clear and convincing evidence one of the following:
(A)That the child was removed initially under subdivision (g) of Section 300 and the whereabouts of the parent are still unknown.
(B)That the parent has failed to contact and visit the child.
(C)That the parent has been convicted of a felony indicating parental unfitness.
(3)(A)Notwithstanding subparagraphs (A), (B), and (C) of paragraph (1), court-ordered services may be extended up to a maximum time period not to exceed 18 months after the date the child was originally removed from physical custody of his or her parent or guardian if it can be shown, at the hearing held pursuant to subdivision (f) of Section 366.21, that the permanent plan for the child is that he or she will be returned and safely maintained in the home within the extended time period. The court shall extend the time period only if it finds that there is a substantial probability that the child will be returned to the physical custody of his or her parent or guardian within the extended time period or that reasonable services have not been provided to the parent or guardian. In determining whether court-ordered services may be extended, the court shall consider the special circumstances of an incarcerated or institutionalized parent or parents, parent or parents court-ordered to a residential substance abuse treatment program, or a parent who has been arrested and issued an immigration hold, detained by the United States Department of Homeland Security, or deported to his or her country of origin, including, but not limited to, barriers to the parents or guardians access to services and ability to maintain contact with his or her child. The court shall also consider, among other factors, good faith efforts that the parent or guardian has made to maintain contact with the child. If the court extends the time period, the court shall specify the factual basis for its conclusion that there is a substantial probability that the child will be returned to the physical custody of his or her parent or guardian within the extended time period. The court also shall make findings pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 366 and subdivision (e) of Section 358.1.
(B)When counseling or other treatment services are ordered, the parent or guardian shall be ordered to participate in those services, unless the parents or guardians participation is deemed by the court to be inappropriate or potentially detrimental to the child, or unless a parent or guardian is incarcerated or detained by the United States Department of Homeland Security and the corrections facility in which he or she is incarcerated does not provide access to the treatment services ordered by the court, or has been deported to his or her country of origin and services ordered by the court are not accessible in that country. Physical custody of the child by the parents or guardians during the applicable time period under subparagraph (A), (B), or (C) of paragraph (1) shall not serve to interrupt the running of the time period. If at the end of the applicable time period, a child cannot be safely returned to the care and custody of a parent or guardian without court supervision, but the child clearly desires contact with the parent or guardian, the court shall take the childs desire into account in devising a permanency plan.
(C)In cases where the child was under three years of age on the date of the initial removal from the physical custody of his or her parent or guardian or is a member of a sibling group as described in subparagraph (C) of paragraph (1), the court shall inform the parent or guardian that the failure of the parent or guardian to participate regularly in any court-ordered treatment programs or to cooperate or avail himself or herself of services provided as part of the child welfare services case plan may result in a termination of efforts to reunify the family after six months. The court shall inform the parent or guardian of the factors used in subdivision (e) of Section 366.21 to determine whether to limit services to six months for some or all members of a sibling group as described in subparagraph (C) of paragraph (1).
(4)(A)Notwithstanding paragraph (3), court-ordered services may be extended up to a maximum time period not to exceed 24 months after the date the child was originally removed from physical custody of his or her parent or guardian if it is shown, at the hearing held pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 366.22, that the permanent plan for the child is that he or she will be returned and safely maintained in the home within the extended time period. The court shall extend the time period only if it finds that it is in the childs best interest to have the time period extended and that there is a substantial probability that the child will be returned to the physical custody of his or her parent or guardian who is described in subdivision (b) of Section 366.22 within the extended time period, or that reasonable services have not been provided to the parent or guardian. If the court extends the time period, the court shall specify the factual basis for its conclusion that there is a substantial probability that the child will be returned to the physical custody of his or her parent or guardian within the extended time period. The court also shall make findings pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 366 and subdivision (e) of Section 358.1.
(B)When counseling or other treatment services are ordered, the parent or guardian shall be ordered to participate in those services, in order for substantial probability to be found. Physical custody of the child by the parents or guardians during the applicable time period under subparagraph (A), (B), or (C) of paragraph (1) shall not serve to interrupt the running of the time period. If at the end of the applicable time period, the child cannot be safely returned to the care and custody of a parent or guardian without court supervision, but the child clearly desires contact with the parent or guardian, the court shall take the childs desire into account in devising a permanency plan.
(C)Except in cases where, pursuant to subdivision (b), the court does not order reunification services, the court shall inform the parent or parents of Section 366.26 and shall specify that the parents or parents parental rights may be terminated.
(b)Reunification services need not be provided to a parent or guardian described in this subdivision when the court finds, by clear and convincing evidence, any of the following:
(1)That the whereabouts of the parent or guardian are unknown. A finding pursuant to this paragraph shall be supported by an affidavit or by proof that a reasonably diligent search has failed to locate the parent or guardian. The posting or publication of notices is not required in that search.
(2)That the parent or guardian is suffering from a mental disability that is described in Chapter 2 (commencing with Section 7820) of Part 4 of Division 12 of the Family Code and that renders him or her incapable of utilizing those services.
(3)That the child or a sibling of the child has been previously adjudicated a dependent pursuant to any subdivision of Section 300 as a result of physical or sexual abuse, that following that adjudication the child had been removed from the custody of his or her parent or guardian pursuant to Section 361, that the child has been returned to the custody of the parent or guardian from whom the child had been taken originally, and that the child is being removed pursuant to Section 361, due to additional physical or sexual abuse.
(4)That the parent or guardian of the child has caused the death of another child through abuse or neglect.
(5)That the child was brought within the jurisdiction of the court under subdivision (e) of Section 300 because of the conduct of that parent or guardian.
(6)(A)That the child has been adjudicated a dependent pursuant to any subdivision of Section 300 as a result of severe sexual abuse or the infliction of severe physical harm to the child, a sibling, or a half sibling by a parent or guardian, as defined in this subdivision, and the court makes a factual finding that it would not benefit the child to pursue reunification services with the offending parent or guardian.
(B)A finding of severe sexual abuse, for the purposes of this subdivision, may be based on, but is not limited to, sexual intercourse, or stimulation involving genital-genital, oral-genital, anal-genital, or oral-anal contact, whether between the parent or guardian and the child or a sibling or half sibling of the child, or between the child or a sibling or half sibling of the child and another person or animal with the actual or implied consent of the parent or guardian; or the penetration or manipulation of the childs, siblings, or half siblings genital organs or rectum by any animate or inanimate object for the sexual gratification of the parent or guardian, or for the sexual gratification of another person with the actual or implied consent of the parent or guardian.
(C)A finding of the infliction of severe physical harm, for the purposes of this subdivision, may be based on, but is not limited to, deliberate and serious injury inflicted to or on a childs body or the body of a sibling or half sibling of the child by an act or omission of the parent or guardian, or of another individual or animal with the consent of the parent or guardian; deliberate and torturous confinement of the child, sibling, or half sibling in a closed space; or any other torturous act or omission that would be reasonably understood to cause serious emotional damage.
(7)That the parent is not receiving reunification services for a sibling or a half sibling of the child pursuant to paragraph (3), (5), or (6).
(8)That the child was conceived by means of the commission of an offense listed in Section 288 or 288.5 of the Penal Code, or by an act committed outside of this state that, if committed in this state, would constitute one of those offenses. This paragraph only applies to the parent who committed the offense or act.
(9)That the child has been found to be a child described in subdivision (g) of Section 300; that the parent or guardian of the child willfully abandoned the child, and the court finds that the abandonment itself constituted a serious danger to the child; or that the parent or other person having custody of the child voluntarily surrendered physical custody of the child pursuant to Section 1255.7 of the Health and Safety Code. For the purposes of this paragraph, serious danger means that without the intervention of another person or agency, the child would have sustained severe or permanent disability, injury, illness, or death. For purposes of this paragraph, willful abandonment shall not be construed as actions taken in good faith by the parent without the intent of placing the child in serious danger.
(10)That the court ordered termination of reunification services for any siblings or half siblings of the child because the parent or guardian failed to reunify with the sibling or half sibling after the sibling or half sibling had been removed from that parent or guardian pursuant to Section 361 and that parent or guardian is the same parent or guardian described in subdivision (a) and that, according to the findings of the court, this parent or guardian has not subsequently made a reasonable effort to treat the problems that led to removal of the sibling or half sibling of that child from that parent or guardian.
(11)That the parental rights of a parent over any sibling or half sibling of the child had been permanently severed, and this parent is the same parent described in subdivision (a), and that, according to the findings of the court, this parent has not subsequently made a reasonable effort to treat the problems that led to removal of the sibling or half sibling of that child from the parent.
(12)That the parent or guardian of the child has been convicted of a violent felony, as defined in subdivision (c) of Section 667.5 of the Penal Code.
(13)That the parent or guardian of the child has a history of extensive, abusive, and chronic use of drugs or alcohol and has resisted prior court-ordered treatment for this problem during a three-year period immediately prior to the filing of the petition that brought that child to the courts attention, or has failed or refused to comply with a program of drug or alcohol treatment described in the case plan required by Section 358.1 on at least two prior occasions, even though the programs identified were available and accessible.
(14)(A)That the parent or guardian of the child has advised the court that he or she is not interested in receiving family maintenance or family reunification services or having the child returned to or placed in his or her custody and does not wish to receive family maintenance or reunification services.
(B)The parent or guardian shall be represented by counsel and shall execute a waiver of services form to be adopted by the Judicial Council. The court shall advise the parent or guardian of any right to services and of the possible consequences of a waiver of services, including the termination of parental rights and placement of the child for adoption. The court shall not accept the waiver of services unless it states on the record its finding that the parent or guardian has knowingly and intelligently waived the right to services.
(15)That the parent or guardian has on one or more occasions willfully abducted the child or childs sibling or half sibling from his or her placement and refused to disclose the childs or childs siblings or half siblings whereabouts, refused to return physical custody of the child or childs sibling or half sibling to his or her placement, or refused to return physical custody of the child or childs sibling or half sibling to the social worker.
(16)That the parent or guardian has been required by the court to be registered on a sex offender registry under the federal Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006 (42 U.S.C. Sec. 16913(a)), as required in Section 106(b)(2)(B)(xvi)(VI) of the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act of 2006 (42 U.S.C. Sec. 5106a(2)(B)(xvi)(VI)).
(17)That the parent or guardian knowingly participated in, or permitted, the sexual exploitation, as described in subdivision (c) or (d) of Section 11165.1 of, or subdivision (c) of Section 236.1 of, the Penal Code, of the child. This shall not include instances in which the parent or guardian demonstrated by a preponderance of the evidence that he or she was coerced into permitting, or participating in, the sexual exploitation of the child.
(c)(1)In deciding whether to order reunification in any case in which this section applies, the court shall hold a dispositional hearing. The social worker shall prepare a report that discusses whether reunification services shall be provided. When it is alleged, pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (b), that the parent is incapable of utilizing services due to mental disability, the court shall order reunification services unless competent evidence from mental health professionals establishes that, even with the provision of services, the parent is unlikely to be capable of adequately caring for the child within the time limits specified in subdivision (a).
(2)The court shall not order reunification for a parent or guardian described in paragraph (3), (4), (6), (7), (8), (9), (10), (11), (12), (13), (14), (15), (16), or (17) of subdivision (b) unless the court finds, by clear and convincing evidence, that reunification is in the best interest of the child.
(3)In addition, the court shall not order reunification in any situation described in paragraph (5) of subdivision (b) unless it finds that, based on competent testimony, those services are likely to prevent reabuse or continued neglect of the child or that failure to try reunification will be detrimental to the child because the child is closely and positively attached to that parent. The social worker shall investigate the circumstances leading to the removal of the child and advise the court whether there are circumstances that indicate that reunification is likely to be successful or unsuccessful and whether failure to order reunification is likely to be detrimental to the child.
(4)The failure of the parent to respond to previous services, the fact that the child was abused while the parent was under the influence of drugs or alcohol, a past history of violent behavior, or testimony by a competent professional that the parents behavior is unlikely to be changed by services are among the factors indicating that reunification services are unlikely to be successful. The fact that a parent or guardian is no longer living with an individual who severely abused the child may be considered in deciding that reunification services are likely to be successful, provided that the court shall consider any pattern of behavior on the part of the parent that has exposed the child to repeated abuse.
(d)If reunification services are not ordered pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (b) and the whereabouts of a parent become known within six months of the out-of-home placement of the child, the court shall order the social worker to provide family reunification services in accordance with this subdivision.
(e)(1)If the parent or guardian is incarcerated, institutionalized, or detained by the United States Department of Homeland Security, or has been deported to his or her country of origin, the court shall order reasonable services unless the court determines, by clear and convincing evidence, those services would be detrimental to the child. In determining detriment, the court shall consider the age of the child, the degree of parent-child bonding, the length of the sentence, the length and nature of the treatment, the nature of the crime or illness, the degree of detriment to the child if services are not offered and, for children 10 years of age or older, the childs attitude toward the implementation of family reunification services, the likelihood of the parents discharge from incarceration, institutionalization, or detention within the reunification time limitations described in subdivision (a), and any other appropriate factors. In determining the content of reasonable services, the court shall consider the particular barriers to an incarcerated, institutionalized, detained, or deported parents access to those court-mandated services and ability to maintain contact with his or her child, and shall document this information in the childs case plan. Reunification services are subject to the applicable time limitations imposed in subdivision (a). Services may include, but shall not be limited to, all of the following:
(A)Maintaining contact between the parent and child through collect telephone calls.
(B)Transportation services, where appropriate.
(C)Visitation services, where appropriate.
(D)(i)Reasonable services to extended family members or foster parents providing care for the child if the services are not detrimental to the child.
(ii)An incarcerated or detained parent may be required to attend counseling, parenting classes, or vocational training programs as part of the reunification service plan if actual access to these services is provided. The social worker shall document in the childs case plan the particular barriers to an incarcerated, institutionalized, or detained parents access to those court-mandated services and ability to maintain contact with his or her child.
(E)Reasonable efforts to assist parents who have been deported to contact child welfare authorities in their country of origin, to identify any available services that would substantially comply with case plan requirements, to document the parents participation in those services, and to accept reports from local child welfare authorities as to the parents living situation, progress, and participation in services.
(2)The presiding judge of the juvenile court of each county may convene representatives of the county welfare department, the sheriffs department, and other appropriate entities for the purpose of developing and entering into protocols for ensuring the notification, transportation, and presence of an incarcerated or institutionalized parent at all court hearings involving proceedings affecting the child pursuant to Section 2625 of the Penal Code. The county welfare department shall utilize the prisoner locator system developed by the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to facilitate timely and effective notice of hearings for incarcerated parents.
(3)Notwithstanding any other law, if the incarcerated parent is a woman seeking to participate in the community treatment program operated by the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation pursuant to Chapter 4.8 (commencing with Section 1174) of Title 7 of Part 2 of, or Chapter 4 (commencing with Section 3410) of Title 2 of Part 3 of, the Penal Code, the court shall determine whether the parents participation in a program is in the childs best interest and whether it is suitable to meet the needs of the parent and child.
(f)If the court, pursuant to paragraph (2), (3), (4), (5), (6), (7), (8), (9), (10), (11), (12), (13), (14), (15), (16), or (17) of subdivision (b) or paragraph (1) of subdivision (e), does not order reunification services, it shall, at the dispositional hearing, that shall include a permanency hearing, determine if a hearing under Section 366.26 shall be set in order to determine whether adoption, guardianship, or long-term foster care, or, in the case of an Indian child, in consultation with the childs tribe, tribal customary adoption, is the most appropriate plan for the child, and shall consider in-state and out-of-state placement options. If the court so determines, it shall conduct the hearing pursuant to Section 366.26 within 120 days after the dispositional hearing. However, the court shall not schedule a hearing so long as the other parent is being provided reunification services pursuant to subdivision (a). The court may continue to permit the parent to visit the child unless it finds that visitation would be detrimental to the child.
(g)(1)Whenever a court orders that a hearing shall be held pursuant to Section 366.26, including, when, in consultation with the childs tribe, tribal customary adoption is recommended, it shall direct the agency supervising the child and the county adoption agency, or the State Department of Social Services when it is acting as an adoption agency, to prepare an assessment that shall include:
(A)Current search efforts for an absent parent or parents and notification of a noncustodial parent in the manner provided for in Section 291.
(B)A review of the amount of and nature of any contact between the child and his or her parents and other members of his or her extended family since the time of placement. Although the extended family of each child shall be reviewed on a case-by-case basis, extended family for the purpose of this subparagraph shall include, but not be limited to, the childs siblings, grandparents, aunts, and uncles.
(C)An evaluation of the childs medical, developmental, scholastic, mental, and emotional status.
(D)A preliminary assessment of the eligibility and commitment of any identified prospective adoptive parent or guardian, including a prospective tribal customary adoptive parent, particularly the caretaker, to include a social history, including screening for criminal records and prior referrals for child abuse or neglect, the capability to meet the childs needs, and the understanding of the legal and financial rights and responsibilities of adoption and guardianship. If a proposed guardian is a relative of the minor, the assessment shall also consider, but need not be limited to, all of the factors specified in subdivision (a) of Section 361.3 and in Section 361.4. As used in this subparagraph, relative means an adult who is related to the minor by blood, adoption, or affinity within the fifth degree of kinship, including stepparents, stepsiblings, and all relatives whose status is preceded by the words great, great-great, or grand, or the spouse of any of those persons even if the marriage was terminated by death or dissolution. If the proposed permanent plan is guardianship with an approved relative caregiver for a minor eligible for aid under the Kin-GAP Program, as provided for in Article 4.7 (commencing with Section 11385) of Chapter 2 of Part 3 of Division 9, relative as used in this section has the same meaning as relative as defined in subdivision (c) of Section 11391.
(E)The relationship of the child to any identified prospective adoptive parent or guardian, including a prospective tribal customary parent, the duration and character of the relationship, the degree of attachment of the child to the prospective relative guardian or adoptive parent, the relatives or adoptive parents strong commitment to caring permanently for the child, the motivation for seeking adoption or guardianship, a statement from the child concerning placement and the adoption or guardianship, and whether the child over 12 years of age has been consulted about the proposed relative guardianship arrangements, unless the childs age or physical, emotional, or other condition precludes his or her meaningful response, and if so, a description of the condition.
(F)An analysis of the likelihood that the child will be adopted if parental rights are terminated.
(G)In the case of an Indian child, in addition to subparagraphs (A) to (F), inclusive, an assessment of the likelihood that the child will be adopted, when, in consultation with the childs tribe, a customary adoption, as defined in Section 366.24, is recommended. If tribal customary adoption is recommended, the assessment shall include an analysis of both of the following:
(i)Whether tribal customary adoption would or would not be detrimental to the Indian child and the reasons for reaching that conclusion.
(ii)Whether the Indian child cannot or should not be returned to the home of the Indian parent or Indian custodian and the reasons for reaching that conclusion.
(2)(A)A relative caregivers preference for legal guardianship over adoption, if it is due to circumstances that do not include an unwillingness to accept legal or financial responsibility for the child, shall not constitute the sole basis for recommending removal of the child from the relative caregiver for purposes of adoptive placement.
(B)Regardless of his or her immigration status, a relative caregiver shall be given information regarding the permanency options of guardianship and adoption, including the long-term benefits and consequences of each option, prior to establishing legal guardianship or pursuing adoption. If the proposed permanent plan is guardianship with an approved relative caregiver for a minor eligible for aid under the Kin-GAP Program, as provided for in Article 4.7 (commencing with Section 11385) of Chapter 2 of Part 3 of Division 9, the relative caregiver shall be informed about the terms and conditions of the negotiated agreement pursuant to Section 11387 and shall agree to its execution prior to the hearing held pursuant to Section 366.26. A copy of the executed negotiated agreement shall be attached to the assessment.
(h)If, at any hearing held pursuant to Section 366.26, a guardianship is established for the minor with an approved relative caregiver and juvenile court dependency is subsequently dismissed, the minor shall be eligible for aid under the Kin-GAP Program as provided for in Article 4.5 (commencing with Section 11360) or Article 4.7 (commencing with Section 11385), as applicable, of Chapter 2 of Part 3 of Division 9.
(i)In determining whether reunification services will benefit the child pursuant to paragraph (6) or (7) of subdivision (b), the court shall consider any information it deems relevant, including the following factors:
(1)The specific act or omission comprising the severe sexual abuse or the severe physical harm inflicted on the child or the childs sibling or half sibling.
(2)The circumstances under which the abuse or harm was inflicted on the child or the childs sibling or half sibling.
(3)The severity of the emotional trauma suffered by the child or the childs sibling or half sibling.
(4)Any history of abuse of other children by the offending parent or guardian.
(5)The likelihood that the child may be safely returned to the care of the offending parent or guardian within 12 months with no continuing supervision.
(6)Whether or not the child desires to be reunified with the offending parent or guardian.
(j)When the court determines that reunification services will not be ordered, it shall order that the childs caregiver receive the childs birth certificate in accordance with Sections 16010.4 and 16010.5. Additionally, when the court determines that reunification services will not be ordered, it shall order, when appropriate, that a child who is 16 years of age or older receive his or her birth certificate.
(k)The court shall read into the record the basis for a finding of severe sexual abuse or the infliction of severe physical harm under paragraph (6) of subdivision (b), and shall also specify the factual findings used to determine that the provision of reunification services to the offending parent or guardian would not benefit the child.
(a)Except as provided in subdivision (b), or when the parent has voluntarily relinquished the child and the relinquishment has been filed with the State Department of Social Services, or upon the establishment of an order of guardianship pursuant to Section 360, or when a court adjudicates a petition under Section 329 to modify the courts jurisdiction from delinquency jurisdiction to dependency jurisdiction pursuant to subparagraph (A) of paragraph (2) of subdivision (b) of Section 607.2 and the parents or guardian of the ward have had reunification services terminated under the delinquency jurisdiction, whenever a child is removed from a parents or guardians custody, the juvenile court shall order the social worker to provide child welfare services to the child and the childs mother and statutorily presumed father or guardians. Upon a finding and declaration of paternity by the juvenile court or proof of a prior declaration of paternity by any court of competent jurisdiction, the juvenile court may order services for the child and the biological father, if the court determines that the services will benefit the child.
(1)Family reunification services, when provided, shall be provided as follows:
(A)Except as otherwise provided in subparagraph (C), for a child who, on the date of initial removal from the physical custody of his or her parent or guardian, was three years of age or older, court-ordered services shall be provided beginning with the dispositional hearing and ending 12 months after the date the child entered foster care as provided in Section 361.49, unless the child is returned to the home of the parent or guardian.
(B)For a child who, on the date of initial removal from the physical custody of his or her parent or guardian, was under three years of age, court-ordered services shall be provided for a period of six months from the dispositional hearing as provided in subdivision (e) of Section 366.21, but no longer than 12 months from the date the child entered foster care care, as provided in Section 361.49 361.49, unless the child is returned to the home of the parent or guardian.
(C)For the purpose of placing and maintaining a sibling group together in a permanent home should reunification efforts fail, for a child in a sibling group whose members were removed from parental custody at the same time, and in which one member of the sibling group was under three years of age on the date of initial removal from the physical custody of his or her parent or guardian, court-ordered services for some or all of the sibling group may be limited as set forth in subparagraph (B). For the purposes of this paragraph, a sibling group shall mean two or more children who are related to each other as full or half siblings.
(2)Any motion to terminate court-ordered reunification services prior to the hearing set pursuant to subdivision (f) of Section 366.21 for a child described by subparagraph (A) of paragraph (1), or prior to the hearing set pursuant to subdivision (e) of Section 366.21 for a child described by subparagraph (B) or (C) of paragraph (1), shall be made pursuant to the requirements set forth in subdivision (c) of Section 388. A motion to terminate court-ordered reunification services shall not be required at the hearing set pursuant to subdivision (e) of Section 366.21 if the court finds by clear and convincing evidence one of the following:
(A)That the child was removed initially under subdivision (g) of Section 300 and the whereabouts of the parent are still unknown.
(B)That the parent has failed to contact and visit the child.
(C)That the parent has been convicted of a felony indicating parental unfitness.
(3)(A)Notwithstanding subparagraphs (A), (B), and (C) of paragraph (1), court-ordered services may be extended up to a maximum time period not to exceed 18 months after the date the child was originally removed from physical custody of his or her parent or guardian if it can be shown, at the hearing held pursuant to subdivision (f) of Section 366.21, that the permanent plan for the child is that he or she will be returned and safely maintained in the home within the extended time period. The court shall extend the time period only if it finds that there is a substantial probability that the child will be returned to the physical custody of his or her parent or guardian within the extended time period or that reasonable services have not been provided to the parent or guardian. In determining whether court-ordered services may be extended, the court shall consider the special circumstances of an incarcerated or institutionalized parent or parents, parent or parents court-ordered to a residential substance abuse treatment program, or a parent who has been arrested and issued an immigration hold, detained by the United States Department of Homeland Security, or deported to his or her country of origin, including, but not limited to, barriers to the parents or guardians access to services and ability to maintain contact with his or her child. The court shall also consider, among other factors, good faith efforts that the parent or guardian has made to maintain contact with the child. If the court extends the time period, the court shall specify the factual basis for its conclusion that there is a substantial probability that the child will be returned to the physical custody of his or her parent or guardian within the extended time period. The court also shall make findings pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 366 and subdivision (e) of Section 358.1.
(B)When counseling or other treatment services are ordered, the parent or guardian shall be ordered to participate in those services, unless the parents or guardians participation is deemed by the court to be inappropriate or potentially detrimental to the child, or unless a parent or guardian is incarcerated or detained by the United States Department of Homeland Security and the corrections facility in which he or she is incarcerated does not provide access to the treatment services ordered by the court, or has been deported to his or her country of origin and services ordered by the court are not accessible in that country. Physical custody of the child by the parents or guardians during the applicable time period under subparagraph (A), (B), or (C) of paragraph (1) shall not serve to interrupt the running of the time period. If at the end of the applicable time period, a child cannot be safely returned to the care and custody of a parent or guardian without court supervision, but the child clearly desires contact with the parent or guardian, the court shall take the childs desire into account in devising a permanency plan.
(C)In cases where the child was under three years of age on the date of the initial removal from the physical custody of his or her parent or guardian or is a member of a sibling group as described in subparagraph (C) of paragraph (1), the court shall inform the parent or guardian that the failure of the parent or guardian to participate regularly in any court-ordered treatment programs or to cooperate or avail himself or herself of services provided as part of the child welfare services case plan may result in a termination of efforts to reunify the family after six months. The court shall inform the parent or guardian of the factors used in subdivision (e) of Section 366.21 to determine whether to limit services to six months for some or all members of a sibling group as described in subparagraph (C) of paragraph (1).
(4)(A)Notwithstanding paragraph (3), court-ordered services may be extended up to a maximum time period not to exceed 24 months after the date the child was originally removed from physical custody of his or her parent or guardian if it is shown, at the hearing held pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 366.22, that the permanent plan for the child is that he or she will be returned and safely maintained in the home within the extended time period. The court shall extend the time period only if it finds that it is in the childs best interest to have the time period extended and that there is a substantial probability that the child will be returned to the physical custody of his or her parent or guardian who is described in subdivision (b) of Section 366.22 within the extended time period, or that reasonable services have not been provided to the parent or guardian. If the court extends the time period, the court shall specify the factual basis for its conclusion that there is a substantial probability that the child will be returned to the physical custody of his or her parent or guardian within the extended time period. The court also shall make findings pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 366 and subdivision (e) of Section 358.1.
(B)When counseling or other treatment services are ordered, the parent or guardian shall be ordered to participate in those services, in order for substantial probability to be found. Physical custody of the child by the parents or guardians during the applicable time period under subparagraph (A), (B), or (C) of paragraph (1) shall not serve to interrupt the running of the time period. If at the end of the applicable time period, the child cannot be safely returned to the care and custody of a parent or guardian without court supervision, but the child clearly desires contact with the parent or guardian, the court shall take the childs desire into account in devising a permanency plan.
(C)Except in cases where, pursuant to subdivision (b), the court does not order reunification services, the court shall inform the parent or parents of Section 366.26 and shall specify that the parents or parents parental rights may be terminated.
(b)Reunification services need not be provided to a parent or guardian described in this subdivision when the court finds, by clear and convincing evidence, any of the following:
(1)That the whereabouts of the parent or guardian is are unknown. A finding pursuant to this paragraph shall be supported by an affidavit or by proof that a reasonably diligent search has failed to locate the parent or guardian. The posting or publication of notices is not required in that search.
(2)That the parent or guardian is suffering from a mental disability that is described in Chapter 2 (commencing with Section 7820) of Part 4 of Division 12 of the Family Code and that renders him or her incapable of utilizing those services.
(3)That the child or a sibling of the child has been previously adjudicated a dependent pursuant to any subdivision of Section 300 as a result of physical or sexual abuse, that following that adjudication the child had been removed from the custody of his or her parent or guardian pursuant to Section 361, that the child has been returned to the custody of the parent or guardian from whom the child had been taken originally, and that the child is being removed pursuant to Section 361, due to additional physical or sexual abuse.
(4)That the parent or guardian of the child has caused the death of another child through abuse or neglect.
(5)That the child was brought within the jurisdiction of the court under subdivision (e) of Section 300 because of the conduct of that parent or guardian.
(6)(A)That the child has been adjudicated a dependent pursuant to any subdivision of Section 300 as a result of severe sexual abuse or the infliction of severe physical harm to the child, a sibling, or a half sibling by a parent or guardian, as defined in this subdivision, and the court makes a factual finding that it would not benefit the child to pursue reunification services with the offending parent or guardian.
(B)A finding of severe sexual abuse, for the purposes of this subdivision, may be based on, but is not limited to, sexual intercourse, or stimulation involving genital-genital, oral-genital, anal-genital, or oral-anal contact, whether between the parent or guardian and the child or a sibling or half sibling of the child, or between the child or a sibling or half sibling of the child and another person or animal with the actual or implied consent of the parent or guardian; or the penetration or manipulation of the childs, siblings, or half siblings genital organs or rectum by any animate or inanimate object for the sexual gratification of the parent or guardian, or for the sexual gratification of another person with the actual or implied consent of the parent or guardian.
(C)A finding of the infliction of severe physical harm, for the purposes of this subdivision, may be based on, but is not limited to, deliberate and serious injury inflicted to or on a childs body or the body of a sibling or half sibling of the child by an act or omission of the parent or guardian, or of another individual or animal with the consent of the parent or guardian; deliberate and torturous confinement of the child, sibling, or half sibling in a closed space; or any other torturous act or omission that would be reasonably understood to cause serious emotional damage.
(7)That the parent is not receiving reunification services for a sibling or a half sibling of the child pursuant to paragraph (3), (5), or (6).
(8)That the child was conceived by means of the commission of an offense listed in Section 288 or 288.5 of the Penal Code, or by an act committed outside of this state that, if committed in this state, would constitute one of those offenses. This paragraph only applies to the parent who committed the offense or act.
(9)That the child has been found to be a child described in subdivision (g) of Section 300; that the parent or guardian of the child willfully abandoned the child, and the court finds that the abandonment itself constituted a serious danger to the child; or that the parent or other person having custody of the child voluntarily surrendered physical custody of the child pursuant to Section 1255.7 of the Health and Safety Code. For the purposes of this paragraph, serious danger means that without the intervention of another person or agency, the child would have sustained severe or permanent disability, injury, illness, or death. For purposes of this paragraph, willful abandonment shall not be construed as actions taken in good faith by the parent without the intent of placing the child in serious danger.
(10)That the court ordered termination of reunification services for any siblings or half siblings of the child because the parent or guardian failed to reunify with the sibling or half sibling after the sibling or half sibling had been removed from that parent or guardian pursuant to Section 361 and that parent or guardian is the same parent or guardian described in subdivision (a) and that, according to the findings of the court, this parent or guardian has not subsequently made a reasonable effort to treat the problems that led to removal of the sibling or half sibling of that child from that parent or guardian.
(11)That the parental rights of a parent over any sibling or half sibling of the child had been permanently severed, and this parent is the same parent described in subdivision (a), and that, according to the findings of the court, this parent has not subsequently made a reasonable effort to treat the problems that led to removal of the sibling or half sibling of that child from the parent.
(12)That the parent or guardian of the child has been convicted of a violent felony, as defined in subdivision (c) of Section 667.5 of the Penal Code.
(13)That the parent or guardian of the child has a history of extensive, abusive, and chronic use of drugs or alcohol and has resisted prior court-ordered treatment for this problem during a three-year period immediately prior to the filing of the petition that brought that child to the courts attention, or has failed or refused to comply with a program of drug or alcohol treatment described in the case plan required by Section 358.1 on at least two prior occasions, even though the programs identified were available and accessible.
(14)(A)That the parent or guardian of the child has advised the court that he or she is not interested in receiving family maintenance or family reunification services or having the child returned to or placed in his or her custody and does not wish to receive family maintenance or reunification services.
(B)The parent or guardian shall be represented by counsel and shall execute a waiver of services form to be adopted by the Judicial Council. The court shall advise the parent or guardian of any right to services and of the possible consequences of a waiver of services, including the termination of parental rights and placement of the child for adoption. The court shall not accept the waiver of services unless it states on the record its finding that the parent or guardian has knowingly and intelligently waived the right to services.
(15)That the parent or guardian has on one or more occasions willfully abducted the child or childs sibling or half sibling from his or her placement and refused to disclose the childs or childs siblings or half siblings whereabouts, refused to return physical custody of the child or childs sibling or half sibling to his or her placement, or refused to return physical custody of the child or childs sibling or half sibling to the social worker.
(16)That the parent or guardian has been required by the court to be registered on a sex offender registry under the federal Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006 (42 U.S.C. Sec. 16913(a)), as required in Section 106(b)(2)(B)(xvi)(VI) of the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act of 2006 (42 U.S.C. Sec. 5106a(2)(B)(xvi)(VI)).
(17)That the parent or guardian knowingly participated in, or consented to, permitted, the sexual exploitation, as described in subdivision (c) or (d) of Section 11165.1 of, or subdivision (c) of Section 236.1 of, the Penal Code, of the child. This shall not include instances in which the parent or guardian demonstrated by a preponderance of the evidence that he or she was coerced into consenting to, permitting, or participating in, the sexual exploitation of the child.
(c)(1)In deciding whether to order reunification in any case in which this section applies, the court shall hold a dispositional hearing. The social worker shall prepare a report that discusses whether reunification services shall be provided. When it is alleged, pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (b), that the parent is incapable of utilizing services due to mental disability, the court shall order reunification services unless competent evidence from mental health professionals establishes that, even with the provision of services, the parent is unlikely to be capable of adequately caring for the child within the time limits specified in subdivision (a).
(2)The court shall not order reunification for a parent or guardian described in paragraph (3), (4), (6), (7), (8), (9), (10), (11), (12), (13), (14), (15), (16), or (17) of subdivision (b) unless the court finds, by clear and convincing evidence, that reunification is in the best interest of the child.
(3)In addition, the court shall not order reunification in any situation described in paragraph (5) of subdivision (b) unless it finds that, based on competent testimony, those services are likely to prevent reabuse or continued neglect of the child or that failure to try reunification will be detrimental to the child because the child is closely and positively attached to that parent. The social worker shall investigate the circumstances leading to the removal of the child and advise the court whether there are circumstances that indicate that reunification is likely to be successful or unsuccessful and whether failure to order reunification is likely to be detrimental to the child.
(4)The failure of the parent to respond to previous services, the fact that the child was abused while the parent was under the influence of drugs or alcohol, a past history of violent behavior, or testimony by a competent professional that the parents behavior is unlikely to be changed by services are among the factors indicating that reunification services are unlikely to be successful. The fact that a parent or guardian is no longer living with an individual who severely abused the child may be considered in deciding that reunification services are likely to be successful, provided that the court shall consider any pattern of behavior on the part of the parent that has exposed the child to repeated abuse.
(d)If reunification services are not ordered pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (b) and the whereabouts of a parent become known within six months of the out-of-home placement of the child, the court shall order the social worker to provide family reunification services in accordance with this subdivision.
(e)(1)If the parent or guardian is incarcerated, institutionalized, or detained by the United States Department of Homeland Security, or has been deported to his or her country of origin, the court shall order reasonable services unless the court determines, by clear and convincing evidence, those services would be detrimental to the child. In determining detriment, the court shall consider the age of the child, the degree of parent-child bonding, the length of the sentence, the length and nature of the treatment, the nature of the crime or illness, the degree of detriment to the child if services are not offered and, for children 10 years of age or older, the childs attitude toward the implementation of family reunification services, the likelihood of the parents discharge from incarceration, institutionalization, or detention within the reunification time limitations described in subdivision (a), and any other appropriate factors. In determining the content of reasonable services, the court shall consider the particular barriers to an incarcerated, institutionalized, detained, or deported parents access to those court-mandated services and ability to maintain contact with his or her child, and shall document this information in the childs case plan. Reunification services are subject to the applicable time limitations imposed in subdivision (a). Services may include, but shall not be limited to, all of the following:
(A)Maintaining contact between the parent and child through collect telephone calls.
(B)Transportation services, where appropriate.
(C)Visitation services, where appropriate.
(D)(i)Reasonable services to extended family members or foster parents providing care for the child if the services are not detrimental to the child.
(ii)An incarcerated or detained parent may be required to attend counseling, parenting classes, or vocational training programs as part of the reunification service plan if actual access to these services is provided. The social worker shall document in the childs case plan the particular barriers to an incarcerated, institutionalized, or detained parents access to those court-mandated services and ability to maintain contact with his or her child.
(E)Reasonable efforts to assist parents who have been deported to contact child welfare authorities in their country of origin, to identify any available services that would substantially comply with case plan requirements, to document the parents participation in those services, and to accept reports from local child welfare authorities as to the parents living situation, progress, and participation in services.
(2)The presiding judge of the juvenile court of each county may convene representatives of the county welfare department, the sheriffs department, and other appropriate entities for the purpose of developing and entering into protocols for ensuring the notification, transportation, and presence of an incarcerated or institutionalized parent at all court hearings involving proceedings affecting the child pursuant to Section 2625 of the Penal Code. The county welfare department shall utilize the prisoner locator system developed by the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to facilitate timely and effective notice of hearings for incarcerated parents.
(3)Notwithstanding any other law, if the incarcerated parent is a woman seeking to participate in the community treatment program operated by the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation pursuant to Chapter 4.8 (commencing with Section 1174) of Title 7 of Part 2 of, or Chapter 4 (commencing with Section 3410) of Title 2 of Part 3 of, the Penal Code, the court shall determine whether the parents participation in a program is in the childs best interest and whether it is suitable to meet the needs of the parent and child.
(f)If the court, pursuant to paragraph (2), (3), (4), (5), (6), (7), (8), (9), (10), (11), (12), (13), (14), (15), (16), or (17) of subdivision (b) or paragraph (1) of subdivision (e), does not order reunification services, it shall, at the dispositional hearing, that shall include a permanency hearing, determine if a hearing under Section 366.26 shall be set in order to determine whether adoption, guardianship, or long-term foster care, or or, in the case of an Indian child, in consultation with the childs tribe, tribal customary adoption, is the most appropriate plan for the child, and shall consider in-state and out-of-state placement options. If the court so determines, it shall conduct the hearing pursuant to Section 366.26 within 120 days after the dispositional hearing. However, the court shall not schedule a hearing so long as the other parent is being provided reunification services pursuant to subdivision (a). The court may continue to permit the parent to visit the child unless it finds that visitation would be detrimental to the child.
(g)(1)Whenever a court orders that a hearing shall be held pursuant to Section 366.26, including, when, in consultation with the childs tribe, tribal customary adoption is recommended, it shall direct the agency supervising the child and the county adoption agency, or the State Department of Social Services when it is acting as an adoption agency, to prepare an assessment that shall include:
(A)Current search efforts for an absent parent or parents and notification of a noncustodial parent in the manner provided for in Section 291.
(B)A review of the amount of and nature of any contact between the child and his or her parents and other members of his or her extended family since the time of placement. Although the extended family of each child shall be reviewed on a case-by-case basis, extended family for the purpose of this subparagraph shall include, but not be limited to, the childs siblings, grandparents, aunts, and uncles.
(C)An evaluation of the childs medical, developmental, scholastic, mental, and emotional status.
(D)A preliminary assessment of the eligibility and commitment of any identified prospective adoptive parent or guardian, including a prospective tribal customary adoptive parent, particularly the caretaker, to include a social history, including screening for criminal records and prior referrals for child abuse or neglect, the capability to meet the childs needs, and the understanding of the legal and financial rights and responsibilities of adoption and guardianship. If a proposed guardian is a relative of the minor, the assessment shall also consider, but need not be limited to, all of the factors specified in subdivision (a) of Section 361.3 and in Section 361.4. As used in this subparagraph, relative means an adult who is related to the minor by blood, adoption, or affinity within the fifth degree of kinship, including stepparents, stepsiblings, and all relatives whose status is preceded by the words great, great-great, or grand, or the spouse of any of those persons even if the marriage was terminated by death or dissolution. If the proposed permanent plan is guardianship with an approved relative caregiver for a minor eligible for aid under the Kin-GAP Program, as provided for in Article 4.7 (commencing with Section 11385) of Chapter 2 of Part 3 of Division 9, relative as used in this section has the same meaning as relative as defined in subdivision (c) of Section 11391.
(E)The relationship of the child to any identified prospective adoptive parent or guardian, including a prospective tribal customary parent, the duration and character of the relationship, the degree of attachment of the child to the prospective relative guardian or adoptive parent, the relatives or adoptive parents strong commitment to caring permanently for the child, the motivation for seeking adoption or guardianship, a statement from the child concerning placement and the adoption or guardianship, and whether the child over 12 years of age has been consulted about the proposed relative guardianship arrangements, unless the childs age or physical, emotional, or other condition precludes his or her meaningful response, and if so, a description of the condition.
(F)An analysis of the likelihood that the child will be adopted if parental rights are terminated.
(G)In the case of an Indian child, in addition to subparagraphs (A) to (F), inclusive, an assessment of the likelihood that the child will be adopted, when, in consultation with the childs tribe, a customary adoption, as defined in Section 366.24, is recommended. If tribal customary adoption is recommended, the assessment shall include an analysis of both of the following:
(i)Whether tribal customary adoption would or would not be detrimental to the Indian child and the reasons for reaching that conclusion.
(ii)Whether the Indian child cannot or should not be returned to the home of the Indian parent or Indian custodian and the reasons for reaching that conclusion.
(2)(A)A relative caregivers preference for legal guardianship over adoption, if it is due to circumstances that do not include an unwillingness to accept legal or financial responsibility for the child, shall not constitute the sole basis for recommending removal of the child from the relative caregiver for purposes of adoptive placement.
(B)Regardless of his or her immigration status, a relative caregiver shall be given information regarding the permanency options of guardianship and adoption, including the long-term benefits and consequences of each option, prior to establishing legal guardianship or pursuing adoption. If the proposed permanent plan is guardianship with an approved relative caregiver for a minor eligible for aid under the Kin-GAP Program, as provided for in Article 4.7 (commencing with Section 11385) of Chapter 2 of Part 3 of Division 9, the relative caregiver shall be informed about the terms and conditions of the negotiated agreement pursuant to Section 11387 and shall agree to its execution prior to the hearing held pursuant to Section 366.26. A copy of the executed negotiated agreement shall be attached to the assessment.
(h)If, at any hearing held pursuant to Section 366.26, a guardianship is established for the minor with an approved relative caregiver and juvenile court dependency is subsequently dismissed, the minor shall be eligible for aid under the Kin-GAP Program as provided for in Article 4.5 (commencing with Section 11360) or Article 4.7 (commencing with Section 11385), as applicable, of Chapter 2 of Part 3 of Division 9.
(i)In determining whether reunification services will benefit the child pursuant to paragraph (6) or (7) of subdivision (b), the court shall consider any information it deems relevant, including the following factors:
(1)The specific act or omission comprising the severe sexual abuse or the severe physical harm inflicted on the child or the childs sibling or half sibling.
(2)The circumstances under which the abuse or harm was inflicted on the child or the childs sibling or half sibling.
(3)The severity of the emotional trauma suffered by the child or the childs sibling or half sibling.
(4)Any history of abuse of other children by the offending parent or guardian.
(5)The likelihood that the child may be safely returned to the care of the offending parent or guardian within 12 months with no continuing supervision.
(6)Whether or not the child desires to be reunified with the offending parent or guardian.
(j)When the court determines that reunification services will not be ordered, it shall order that the childs caregiver receive the childs birth certificate in accordance with Sections 16010.4 and 16010.5. Additionally, when the court determines that reunification services will not be ordered, it shall order, when appropriate, that a child who is 16 years of age or older receive his or her birth certificate.
(k)The court shall read into the record the basis for a finding of severe sexual abuse or the infliction of severe physical harm under paragraph (6) of subdivision (b), and shall also specify the factual findings used to determine that the provision of reunification services to the offending parent or guardian would not benefit the child.
(a)Except as provided in subdivision (b), or when the parent has voluntarily relinquished the child and the relinquishment has been filed with the State Department of Social Services, or upon the establishment of an order of guardianship pursuant to Section 360, or when a court adjudicates a petition under Section 329 to modify the courts jurisdiction from delinquency jurisdiction to dependency jurisdiction pursuant to subparagraph (A) of paragraph (2) of subdivision (b) of Section 607.2 and the parents or guardian of the ward have had reunification services terminated under the delinquency jurisdiction, whenever a child is removed from a parents or guardians custody, the juvenile court shall order the social worker to provide child welfare services to the child and the childs mother and statutorily presumed father or guardians. Upon a finding and declaration of paternity by the juvenile court or proof of a prior declaration of paternity by any court of competent jurisdiction, the juvenile court may order services for the child and the biological father, if the court determines that the services will benefit the child.
(1)Family reunification services, when provided, shall be provided as follows:
(A)Except as otherwise provided in subparagraph (C), for a child who, on the date of initial removal from the physical custody of his or her parent or guardian, was three years of age or older, court-ordered services shall be provided beginning with the dispositional hearing and ending 12 months after the date the child entered foster care as provided in Section 361.49, unless the child is returned to the home of the parent or guardian.
(B)For a child who, on the date of initial removal from the physical custody of his or her parent or guardian, was under three years of age, court-ordered services shall be provided for a period of six months from the dispositional hearing as provided in subdivision (e) of Section 366.21, but no longer than 12 months from the date the child entered foster care as provided in Section 361.49 unless the child is returned to the home of the parent or guardian.
(C)For the purpose of placing and maintaining a sibling group together in a permanent home should reunification efforts fail, for a child in a sibling group whose members were removed from parental custody at the same time, and in which one member of the sibling group was under three years of age on the date of initial removal from the physical custody of his or her parent or guardian, court-ordered services for some or all of the sibling group may be limited as set forth in subparagraph (B). For the purposes of this paragraph, a sibling group shall mean two or more children who are related to each other as full or half siblings.
(2)Any motion to terminate court-ordered reunification services prior to the hearing set pursuant to subdivision (f) of Section 366.21 for a child described by subparagraph (A) of paragraph (1), or prior to the hearing set pursuant to subdivision (e) of Section 366.21 for a child described by subparagraph (B) or (C) of paragraph (1), shall be made pursuant to the requirements set forth in subdivision (c) of Section 388. A motion to terminate court-ordered reunification services shall not be required at the hearing set pursuant to subdivision (e) of Section 366.21 if the court finds by clear and convincing evidence one of the following:
(A)That the child was removed initially under subdivision (g) of Section 300 and the whereabouts of the parent are still unknown.
(B)That the parent has failed to contact and visit the child.
(C)That the parent has been convicted of a felony indicating parental unfitness.
(3)(A)Notwithstanding subparagraphs (A), (B), and (C) of paragraph (1), court-ordered services may be extended up to a maximum time period not to exceed 18 months after the date the child was originally removed from physical custody of his or her parent or guardian if it can be shown, at the hearing held pursuant to subdivision (f) of Section 366.21, that the permanent plan for the child is that he or she will be returned and safely maintained in the home within the extended time period. The court shall extend the time period only if it finds that there is a substantial probability that the child will be returned to the physical custody of his or her parent or guardian within the extended time period or that reasonable services have not been provided to the parent or guardian. In determining whether court-ordered services may be extended, the court shall consider the special circumstances of an incarcerated or institutionalized parent or parents, parent or parents court-ordered to a residential substance abuse treatment program, or a parent who has been arrested and issued an immigration hold, detained by the United States Department of Homeland Security, or deported to his or her country of origin, including, but not limited to, barriers to the parents or guardians access to services and ability to maintain contact with his or her child. The court shall also consider, among other factors, good faith efforts that the parent or guardian has made to maintain contact with the child. If the court extends the time period, the court shall specify the factual basis for its conclusion that there is a substantial probability that the child will be returned to the physical custody of his or her parent or guardian within the extended time period. The court also shall make findings pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 366 and subdivision (e) of Section 358.1.
(B)When counseling or other treatment services are ordered, the parent or guardian shall be ordered to participate in those services, unless the parents or guardians participation is deemed by the court to be inappropriate or potentially detrimental to the child, or unless a parent or guardian is incarcerated or detained by the United States Department of Homeland Security and the corrections facility in which he or she is incarcerated does not provide access to the treatment services ordered by the court, or has been deported to his or her country of origin and services ordered by the court are not accessible in that country. Physical custody of the child by the parents or guardians during the applicable time period under subparagraph (A), (B), or (C) of paragraph (1) shall not serve to interrupt the running of the time period. If at the end of the applicable time period, a child cannot be safely returned to the care and custody of a parent or guardian without court supervision, but the child clearly desires contact with the parent or guardian, the court shall take the childs desire into account in devising a permanency plan.
(C)In cases where the child was under three years of age on the date of the initial removal from the physical custody of his or her parent or guardian or is a member of a sibling group as described in subparagraph (C) of paragraph (1), the court shall inform the parent or guardian that the failure of the parent or guardian to participate regularly in any court-ordered treatment programs or to cooperate or avail himself or herself of services provided as part of the child welfare services case plan may result in a termination of efforts to reunify the family after six months. The court shall inform the parent or guardian of the factors used in subdivision (e) of Section 366.21 to determine whether to limit services to six months for some or all members of a sibling group as described in subparagraph (C) of paragraph (1).
(4)(A)Notwithstanding paragraph (3), court-ordered services may be extended up to a maximum time period not to exceed 24 months after the date the child was originally removed from physical custody of his or her parent or guardian if it is shown, at the hearing held pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 366.22, that the permanent plan for the child is that he or she will be returned and safely maintained in the home within the extended time period. The court shall extend the time period only if it finds that it is in the childs best interest to have the time period extended and that there is a substantial probability that the child will be returned to the physical custody of his or her parent or guardian who is described in subdivision (b) of Section 366.22 within the extended time period, or that reasonable services have not been provided to the parent or guardian. If the court extends the time period, the court shall specify the factual basis for its conclusion that there is a substantial probability that the child will be returned to the physical custody of his or her parent or guardian within the extended time period. The court also shall make findings pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 366 and subdivision (e) of Section 358.1.
(B)When counseling or other treatment services are ordered, the parent or guardian shall be ordered to participate in those services, in order for substantial probability to be found. Physical custody of the child by the parents or guardians during the applicable time period under subparagraph (A), (B), or (C) of paragraph (1) shall not serve to interrupt the running of the time period. If at the end of the applicable time period, the child cannot be safely returned to the care and custody of a parent or guardian without court supervision, but the child clearly desires contact with the parent or guardian, the court shall take the childs desire into account in devising a permanency plan.
(C)Except in cases where, pursuant to subdivision (b), the court does not order reunification services, the court shall inform the parent or parents of Section 366.26 and shall specify that the parents or parents parental rights may be terminated.
(b)Reunification services need not be provided to a parent or guardian described in this subdivision when the court finds, by clear and convincing evidence, any of the following:
(1)That the whereabouts of the parent or guardian is unknown. A finding pursuant to this paragraph shall be supported by an affidavit or by proof that a reasonably diligent search has failed to locate the parent or guardian. The posting or publication of notices is not required in that search.
(2)That the parent or guardian is suffering from a mental disability that is described in Chapter 2 (commencing with Section 7820) of Part 4 of Division 12 of the Family Code and that renders him or her incapable of utilizing those services.
(3)That the child or a sibling of the child has been previously adjudicated a dependent pursuant to any subdivision of Section 300 as a result of physical or sexual abuse, that following that adjudication the child had been removed from the custody of his or her parent or guardian pursuant to Section 361, that the child has been returned to the custody of the parent or guardian from whom the child had been taken originally, and that the child is being removed pursuant to Section 361, due to additional physical or sexual abuse.
(4)That the parent or guardian of the child has caused the death of another child through abuse or neglect.
(5)That the child was brought within the jurisdiction of the court under subdivision (e) of Section 300 because of the conduct of that parent or guardian.
(6)(A)That the child has been adjudicated a dependent pursuant to any subdivision of Section 300 as a result of severe sexual abuse or the infliction of severe physical harm to the child, a sibling, or a half sibling by a parent or guardian, as defined in this subdivision, and the court makes a factual finding that it would not benefit the child to pursue reunification services with the offending parent or guardian.
(B)A finding of severe sexual abuse, for the purposes of this subdivision, may be based on, but is not limited to, sexual intercourse, or stimulation involving genital-genital, oral-genital, anal-genital, or oral-anal contact, whether between the parent or guardian and the child or a sibling or half sibling of the child, or between the child or a sibling or half sibling of the child and another person or animal with the actual or implied consent of the parent or guardian; or the penetration or manipulation of the childs, siblings, or half siblings genital organs or rectum by any animate or inanimate object for the sexual gratification of the parent or guardian, or for the sexual gratification of another person with the actual or implied consent of the parent or guardian.
(C)A finding of the infliction of severe physical harm, for the purposes of this subdivision, may be based on, but is not limited to, deliberate and serious injury inflicted to or on a childs body or the body of a sibling or half sibling of the child by an act or omission of the parent or guardian, or of another individual or animal with the consent of the parent or guardian; deliberate and torturous confinement of the child, sibling, or half sibling in a closed space; or any other torturous act or omission that would be reasonably understood to cause serious emotional damage.
(7)That the parent is not receiving reunification services for a sibling or a half sibling of the child pursuant to paragraph (3), (5), or (6).
(8)That the child was conceived by means of the commission of an offense listed in Section 288 or 288.5 of the Penal Code, or by an act committed outside of this state that, if committed in this state, would constitute one of those offenses. This paragraph only applies to the parent who committed the offense or act.
(9)That the child has been found to be a child described in subdivision (g) of Section 300; that the parent or guardian of the child willfully abandoned the child, and the court finds that the abandonment itself constituted a serious danger to the child; or that the parent or other person having custody of the child voluntarily surrendered physical custody of the child pursuant to Section 1255.7 of the Health and Safety Code. For the purposes of this paragraph, serious danger means that without the intervention of another person or agency, the child would have sustained severe or permanent disability, injury, illness, or death. For purposes of this paragraph, willful abandonment shall not be construed as actions taken in good faith by the parent without the intent of placing the child in serious danger.
(10)That the court ordered termination of reunification services for any siblings or half siblings of the child because the parent or guardian failed to reunify with the sibling or half sibling after the sibling or half sibling had been removed from that parent or guardian pursuant to Section 361 and that parent or guardian is the same parent or guardian described in subdivision (a) and that, according to the findings of the court, this parent or guardian has not subsequently made a reasonable effort to treat the problems that led to removal of the sibling or half sibling of that child from that parent or guardian.
(11)That the parental rights of a parent over any sibling or half sibling of the child had been permanently severed, and this parent is the same parent described in subdivision (a), and that, according to the findings of the court, this parent has not subsequently made a reasonable effort to treat the problems that led to removal of the sibling or half sibling of that child from the parent.
(12)That the parent or guardian of the child has been convicted of a violent felony, as defined in subdivision (c) of Section 667.5 of the Penal Code.
(13)That the parent or guardian of the child has a history of extensive, abusive, and chronic use of drugs or alcohol and has resisted prior court-ordered treatment for this problem during a three-year period immediately prior to the filing of the petition that brought that child to the courts attention, or has failed or refused to comply with a program of drug or alcohol treatment described in the case plan required by Section 358.1 on at least two prior occasions, even though the programs identified were available and accessible.
(14)(A)That the parent or guardian of the child has advised the court that he or she is not interested in receiving family maintenance or family reunification services or having the child returned to or placed in his or her custody and does not wish to receive family maintenance or reunification services.
(B)The parent or guardian shall be represented by counsel and shall execute a waiver of services form to be adopted by the Judicial Council. The court shall advise the parent or guardian of any right to services and of the possible consequences of a waiver of services, including the termination of parental rights and placement of the child for adoption. The court shall not accept the waiver of services unless it states on the record its finding that the parent or guardian has knowingly and intelligently waived the right to services.
(15)That the parent or guardian has on one or more occasions willfully abducted the child or childs sibling or half sibling from his or her placement and refused to disclose the childs or childs siblings or half siblings whereabouts, refused to return physical custody of the child or childs sibling or half sibling to his or her placement, or refused to return physical custody of the child or childs sibling or half sibling to the social worker.
(16)That the parent or guardian has been required by the court to be registered on a sex offender registry under the federal Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006 (42 U.S.C. Sec. 16913(a)), as required in Section 106(b)(2)(B)(xvi)(VI) of the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act of 2006 (42 U.S.C. Sec. 5106a(2)(B)(xvi)(VI)).
(17)That the parent or guardian participated in, or consented to, the sexual exploitation, as described in subdivision (c) or (d) of Section 11165.1 of, or subdivision (c) of Section 236.1 of, the Penal Code, of the child. This shall not include instances in which the parent or guardian was coerced into consenting to, or participating in, the sexual exploitation of the child.
(c)(1)In deciding whether to order reunification in any case in which this section applies, the court shall hold a dispositional hearing. The social worker shall prepare a report that discusses whether reunification services shall be provided. When it is alleged, pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (b), that the parent is incapable of utilizing services due to mental disability, the court shall order reunification services unless competent evidence from mental health professionals establishes that, even with the provision of services, the parent is unlikely to be capable of adequately caring for the child within the time limits specified in subdivision (a).
(2)The court shall not order reunification for a parent or guardian described in paragraph (3), (4), (6), (7), (8), (9), (10), (11), (12), (13), (14), (15), (16), or (17) of subdivision (b) unless the court finds, by clear and convincing evidence, that reunification is in the best interest of the child.
(3)In addition, the court shall not order reunification in any situation described in paragraph (5) of subdivision (b) unless it finds that, based on competent testimony, those services are likely to prevent reabuse or continued neglect of the child or that failure to try reunification will be detrimental to the child because the child is closely and positively attached to that parent. The social worker shall investigate the circumstances leading to the removal of the child and advise the court whether there are circumstances that indicate that reunification is likely to be successful or unsuccessful and whether failure to order reunification is likely to be detrimental to the child.
(4)The failure of the parent to respond to previous services, the fact that the child was abused while the parent was under the influence of drugs or alcohol, a past history of violent behavior, or testimony by a competent professional that the parents behavior is unlikely to be changed by services are among the factors indicating that reunification services are unlikely to be successful. The fact that a parent or guardian is no longer living with an individual who severely abused the child may be considered in deciding that reunification services are likely to be successful, provided that the court shall consider any pattern of behavior on the part of the parent that has exposed the child to repeated abuse.
(d)If reunification services are not ordered pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (b) and the whereabouts of a parent become known within six months of the out-of-home placement of the child, the court shall order the social worker to provide family reunification services in accordance with this subdivision.
(e)(1)If the parent or guardian is incarcerated, institutionalized, or detained by the United States Department of Homeland Security, or has been deported to his or her country of origin, the court shall order reasonable services unless the court determines, by clear and convincing evidence, those services would be detrimental to the child. In determining detriment, the court shall consider the age of the child, the degree of parent-child bonding, the length of the sentence, the length and nature of the treatment, the nature of the crime or illness, the degree of detriment to the child if services are not offered and, for children 10 years of age or older, the childs attitude toward the implementation of family reunification services, the likelihood of the parents discharge from incarceration, institutionalization, or detention within the reunification time limitations described in subdivision (a), and any other appropriate factors. In determining the content of reasonable services, the court shall consider the particular barriers to an incarcerated, institutionalized, detained, or deported parents access to those court-mandated services and ability to maintain contact with his or her child, and shall document this information in the childs case plan. Reunification services are subject to the applicable time limitations imposed in subdivision (a). Services may include, but shall not be limited to, all of the following:
(A)Maintaining contact between the parent and child through collect telephone calls.
(B)Transportation services, where appropriate.
(C)Visitation services, where appropriate.
(D)(i)Reasonable services to extended family members or foster parents providing care for the child if the services are not detrimental to the child.
(ii)An incarcerated or detained parent may be required to attend counseling, parenting classes, or vocational training programs as part of the reunification service plan if actual access to these services is provided. The social worker shall document in the childs case plan the particular barriers to an incarcerated, institutionalized, or detained parents access to those court-mandated services and ability to maintain contact with his or her child.
(E)Reasonable efforts to assist parents who have been deported to contact child welfare authorities in their country of origin, to identify any available services that would substantially comply with case plan requirements, to document the parents participation in those services, and to accept reports from local child welfare authorities as to the parents living situation, progress, and participation in services.
(2)The presiding judge of the juvenile court of each county may convene representatives of the county welfare department, the sheriffs department, and other appropriate entities for the purpose of developing and entering into protocols for ensuring the notification, transportation, and presence of an incarcerated or institutionalized parent at all court hearings involving proceedings affecting the child pursuant to Section 2625 of the Penal Code. The county welfare department shall utilize the prisoner locator system developed by the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to facilitate timely and effective notice of hearings for incarcerated parents.
(3)Notwithstanding any other law, if the incarcerated parent is a woman seeking to participate in the community treatment program operated by the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation pursuant to Chapter 4.8 (commencing with Section 1174) of Title 7 of Part 2 of, Chapter 4 (commencing with Section 3410) of Title 2 of Part 3 of, the Penal Code, the court shall determine whether the parents participation in a program is in the childs best interest and whether it is suitable to meet the needs of the parent and child.
(f)If the court, pursuant to paragraph (2), (3), (4), (5), (6), (7), (8), (9), (10), (11), (12), (13), (14), (15), (16), or (17) of subdivision (b) or paragraph (1) of subdivision (e), does not order reunification services, it shall, at the dispositional hearing, that shall include a permanency hearing, determine if a hearing under Section 366.26 shall be set in order to determine whether adoption, guardianship, or long-term foster care, or in the case of an Indian child, in consultation with the childs tribe, tribal customary adoption, is the most appropriate plan for the child, and shall consider in-state and out-of-state placement options. If the court so determines, it shall conduct the hearing pursuant to Section 366.26 within 120 days after the dispositional hearing. However, the court shall not schedule a hearing so long as the other parent is being provided reunification services pursuant to subdivision (a). The court may continue to permit the parent to visit the child unless it finds that visitation would be detrimental to the child.
(g)(1)Whenever a court orders that a hearing shall be held pursuant to Section 366.26, including, when, in consultation with the childs tribe, tribal customary adoption is recommended, it shall direct the agency supervising the child and the county adoption agency, or the State Department of Social Services when it is acting as an adoption agency, to prepare an assessment that shall include:
(A)Current search efforts for an absent parent or parents and notification of a noncustodial parent in the manner provided for in Section 291.
(B)A review of the amount of and nature of any contact between the child and his or her parents and other members of his or her extended family since the time of placement. Although the extended family of each child shall be reviewed on a case-by-case basis, extended family for the purpose of this subparagraph shall include, but not be limited to, the childs siblings, grandparents, aunts, and uncles.
(C)An evaluation of the childs medical, developmental, scholastic, mental, and emotional status.
(D)A preliminary assessment of the eligibility and commitment of any identified prospective adoptive parent or guardian, including a prospective tribal customary adoptive parent, particularly the caretaker, to include a social history, including screening for criminal records and prior referrals for child abuse or neglect, the capability to meet the childs needs, and the understanding of the legal and financial rights and responsibilities of adoption and guardianship. If a proposed guardian is a relative of the minor, the assessment shall also consider, but need not be limited to, all of the factors specified in subdivision (a) of Section 361.3 and in Section 361.4. As used in this subparagraph, relative means an adult who is related to the minor by blood, adoption, or affinity within the fifth degree of kinship, including stepparents, stepsiblings, and all relatives whose status is preceded by the words great, great-great, or grand, or the spouse of any of those persons even if the marriage was terminated by death or dissolution. If the proposed permanent plan is guardianship with an approved relative caregiver for a minor eligible for aid under the Kin-GAP Program, as provided for in Article 4.7 (commencing with Section 11385) of Chapter 2 of Part 3 of Division 9, relative as used in this section has the same meaning as relative as defined in subdivision (c) of Section 11391.
(E)The relationship of the child to any identified prospective adoptive parent or guardian, including a prospective tribal customary parent, the duration and character of the relationship, the degree of attachment of the child to the prospective relative guardian or adoptive parent, the relatives or adoptive parents strong commitment to caring permanently for the child, the motivation for seeking adoption or guardianship, a statement from the child concerning placement and the adoption or guardianship, and whether the child over 12 years of age has been consulted about the proposed relative guardianship arrangements, unless the childs age or physical, emotional, or other condition precludes his or her meaningful response, and if so, a description of the condition.
(F)An analysis of the likelihood that the child will be adopted if parental rights are terminated.
(G)In the case of an Indian child, in addition to subparagraphs (A) to (F), inclusive, an assessment of the likelihood that the child will be adopted, when, in consultation with the childs tribe, a customary adoption, as defined in Section 366.24, is recommended. If tribal customary adoption is recommended, the assessment shall include an analysis of both of the following:
(i)Whether tribal customary adoption would or would not be detrimental to the Indian child and the reasons for reaching that conclusion.
(ii)Whether the Indian child cannot or should not be returned to the home of the Indian parent or Indian custodian and the reasons for reaching that conclusion.
(2)(A)A relative caregivers preference for legal guardianship over adoption, if it is due to circumstances that do not include an unwillingness to accept legal or financial responsibility for the child, shall not constitute the sole basis for recommending removal of the child from the relative caregiver for purposes of adoptive placement.
(B)Regardless of his or her immigration status, a relative caregiver shall be given information regarding the permanency options of guardianship and adoption, including the long-term benefits and consequences of each option, prior to establishing legal guardianship or pursuing adoption. If the proposed permanent plan is guardianship with an approved relative caregiver for a minor eligible for aid under the Kin-GAP Program, as provided for in Article 4.7 (commencing with Section 11385) of Chapter 2 of Part 3 of Division 9, the relative caregiver shall be informed about the terms and conditions of the negotiated agreement pursuant to Section 11387 and shall agree to its execution prior to the hearing held pursuant to Section 366.26. A copy of the executed negotiated agreement shall be attached to the assessment.
(h)If, at any hearing held pursuant to Section 366.26, a guardianship is established for the minor with an approved relative caregiver and juvenile court dependency is subsequently dismissed, the minor shall be eligible for aid under the Kin-GAP Program as provided for in Article 4.5 (commencing with Section 11360) or Article 4.7 (commencing with Section 11385), as applicable, of Chapter 2 of Part 3 of Division 9.
(i)In determining whether reunification services will benefit the child pursuant to paragraph (6) or (7) of subdivision (b), the court shall consider any information it deems relevant, including the following factors:
(1)The specific act or omission comprising the severe sexual abuse or the severe physical harm inflicted on the child or the childs sibling or half sibling.
(2)The circumstances under which the abuse or harm was inflicted on the child or the childs sibling or half sibling.
(3)The severity of the emotional trauma suffered by the child or the childs sibling or half sibling.
(4)Any history of abuse of other children by the offending parent or guardian.
(5)The likelihood that the child may be safely returned to the care of the offending parent or guardian within 12 months with no continuing supervision.
(6)Whether or not the child desires to be reunified with the offending parent or guardian.
(j)When the court determines that reunification services will not be ordered, it shall order that the childs caregiver receive the childs birth certificate in accordance with Sections 16010.4 and 16010.5. Additionally, when the court determines that reunification services will not be ordered, it shall order, when appropriate, that a child who is 16 years of age or older receive his or her birth certificate.
(k)The court shall read into the record the basis for a finding of severe sexual abuse or the infliction of severe physical harm under paragraph (6) of subdivision (b), and shall also specify the factual findings used to determine that the provision of reunification services to the offending parent or guardian would not benefit the child.
(a)Except as provided in subdivision (b), or when the parent has voluntarily relinquished the child and the relinquishment has been filed with the State Department of Social Services, or upon the establishment of an order of guardianship pursuant to Section 360, or when a court adjudicates a petition under Section 329 to modify the courts jurisdiction from delinquency jurisdiction to dependency jurisdiction pursuant to subparagraph (A) of paragraph (2) of subdivision (b) of Section 607.2 and the parents or guardian of the ward have had reunification services terminated under the delinquency jurisdiction, whenever a child is removed from a parents or guardians custody, the juvenile court shall order the social worker to provide child welfare services to the child and the childs mother and statutorily presumed father or guardians. Upon a finding and declaration of paternity by the juvenile court or proof of a prior declaration of paternity by any court of competent jurisdiction, the juvenile court may order services for the child and the biological father, if the court determines that the services will benefit the child.
(1)Family reunification services, when provided, shall be provided as follows:
(A)Except as otherwise provided in subparagraph (C), for a child who, on the date of initial removal from the physical custody of his or her parent or guardian, was three years of age or older, court-ordered services shall be provided beginning with the dispositional hearing and ending 12 months after the date the child entered foster care as provided in Section 361.49, unless the child is returned to the home of the parent or guardian.
(B)For a child who, on the date of initial removal from the physical custody of his or her parent or guardian, was under three years of age, court-ordered services shall be provided for a period of six months from the dispositional hearing as provided in subdivision (e) of Section 366.21, but no longer than 12 months from the date the child entered foster care as provided in Section 361.49 unless the child is returned to the home of the parent or guardian.
(C)For the purpose of placing and maintaining a sibling group together in a permanent home should reunification efforts fail, for a child in a sibling group whose members were removed from parental custody at the same time, and in which one member of the sibling group was under three years of age on the date of initial removal from the physical custody of his or her parent or guardian, court-ordered services for some or all of the sibling group may be limited as set forth in subparagraph (B). For the purposes of this paragraph, a sibling group shall mean two or more children who are related to each other as full or half siblings.
(2)Any motion to terminate court-ordered reunification services prior to the hearing set pursuant to subdivision (f) of Section 366.21 for a child described by subparagraph (A) of paragraph (1), or prior to the hearing set pursuant to subdivision (e) of Section 366.21 for a child described by subparagraph (B) or (C) of paragraph (1), shall be made pursuant to the requirements set forth in subdivision (c) of Section 388. A motion to terminate court-ordered reunification services shall not be required at the hearing set pursuant to subdivision (e) of Section 366.21 if the court finds by clear and convincing evidence one of the following:
(A)That the child was removed initially under subdivision (g) of Section 300 and the whereabouts of the parent are still unknown.
(B)That the parent has failed to contact and visit the child.
(C)That the parent has been convicted of a felony indicating parental unfitness.
(3)(A)Notwithstanding subparagraphs (A), (B), and (C) of paragraph (1), court-ordered services may be extended up to a maximum time period not to exceed 18 months after the date the child was originally removed from physical custody of his or her parent or guardian if it can be shown, at the hearing held pursuant to subdivision (f) of Section 366.21, that the permanent plan for the child is that he or she will be returned and safely maintained in the home within the extended time period. The court shall extend the time period only if it finds that there is a substantial probability that the child will be returned to the physical custody of his or her parent or guardian within the extended time period or that reasonable services have not been provided to the parent or guardian. In determining whether court-ordered services may be extended, the court shall consider the special circumstances of an incarcerated or institutionalized parent or parents, parent or parents court-ordered to a residential substance abuse treatment program, or a parent who has been arrested and issued an immigration hold, detained by the United States Department of Homeland Security, or deported to his or her country of origin, including, but not limited to, barriers to the parents or guardians access to services and ability to maintain contact with his or her child. The court shall also consider, among other factors, good faith efforts that the parent or guardian has made to maintain contact with the child. If the court extends the time period, the court shall specify the factual basis for its conclusion that there is a substantial probability that the child will be returned to the physical custody of his or her parent or guardian within the extended time period. The court also shall make findings pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 366 and subdivision (e) of Section 358.1.
(B)When counseling or other treatment services are ordered, the parent or guardian shall be ordered to participate in those services, unless the parents or guardians participation is deemed by the court to be inappropriate or potentially detrimental to the child, or unless a parent or guardian is incarcerated of or detained by the United States Department of Homeland Security and the corrections facility in which he or she is incarcerated does not provide access to the treatment services ordered by the court, or has been deported to his or her country of origin and services ordered by the court are not accessible in that country. Physical custody of the child by the parents or guardians during the applicable time period under subparagraph (A), (B), or (C) of paragraph (1) shall not serve to interrupt the running of the time period. If at the end of the applicable time period, a child cannot be safely returned to the care and custody of a parent or guardian without court supervision, but the child clearly desires contact with the parent or guardian, the court shall take the childs desire into account in devising a permanency plan.
(C)In cases where the child was under three years of age on the date of the initial removal from the physical custody of his or her parent or guardian or is a member of a sibling group as described in subparagraph (C) of paragraph (1), the court shall inform the parent or guardian that the failure of the parent or guardian to participate regularly in any court-ordered treatment programs or to cooperate or avail himself or herself of services provided as part of the child welfare services case plan may result in a termination of efforts to reunify the family after six months. The court shall inform the parent or guardian of the factors used in subdivision (e) of Section 366.21 to determine whether to limit services to six months for some or all members of a sibling group as described in subparagraph (C) of paragraph (1).
(4)(A)Notwithstanding paragraph (3), court-ordered services may be extended up to a maximum time period not to exceed 24 months after the date the child was originally removed from physical custody of his or her parent or guardian if it is shown, at the hearing held pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 366.22, that the permanent plan for the child is that he or she will be returned and safely maintained in the home within the extended time period. The court shall extend the time period only if it finds that it is in the childs best interest to have the time period extended and that there is a substantial probability that the child will be returned to the physical custody of his or her parent or guardian who is described in subdivision (b) of Section 366.22 within the extended time period, or that reasonable services have not been provided to the parent or guardian. If the court extends the time period, the court shall specify the factual basis for its conclusion that there is a substantial probability that the child will be returned to the physical custody of his or her parent or guardian within the extended time period. The court also shall make findings pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 366 and subdivision (e) of Section 358.1.
(B)When counseling or other treatment services are ordered, the parent or guardian shall be ordered to participate in those services, in order for substantial probability to be found. Physical custody of the child by the parents or guardians during the applicable time period under subparagraph (A), (B), or (C) of paragraph (1) shall not serve to interrupt the running of the time period. If at the end of the applicable time period, the child cannot be safely returned to the care and custody of a parent or guardian without court supervision, but the child clearly desires contact with the parent or guardian, the court shall take the childs desire into account in devising a permanency plan.
(C)Except in cases where, pursuant to subdivision (b), the court does not order reunification services, the court shall inform the parent or parents of Section 366.26 and shall specify that the parents or parents parental rights may be terminated.
(b)Reunification services need not be provided to a parent or guardian described in this subdivision when the court finds, by clear and convincing evidence, any of the following:
(1)That the whereabouts of the parent or guardian is unknown. A finding pursuant to this paragraph shall be supported by an affidavit or by proof that a reasonably diligent search has failed to locate the parent or guardian. The posting or publication of notices is not required in that search.
(2)That the parent or guardian is suffering from a mental disability that is described in Chapter 2 (commencing with Section 7820) of Part 4 of Division 12 of the Family Code and that renders him or her incapable of utilizing those services.
(3)That the child or a sibling of the child has been previously adjudicated a dependent pursuant to any subdivision of Section 300 as a result of physical or sexual abuse, that following that adjudication the child had been removed from the custody of his or her parent or guardian pursuant to Section 361, that the child has been returned to the custody of the parent or guardian from whom the child had been taken originally, and that the child is being removed pursuant to Section 361, due to additional physical or sexual abuse.
(4)That the parent or guardian of the child has caused the death of another child through abuse or neglect.
(5)That the child was brought within the jurisdiction of the court under subdivision (e) of Section 300 because of the conduct of that parent or guardian.
(6)(A)That the child has been adjudicated a dependent pursuant to any subdivision of Section 300 as a result of severe sexual abuse or the infliction of severe physical harm to the child, a sibling, or a half sibling by a parent or guardian, as defined in this subdivision, and the court makes a factual finding that it would not benefit the child to pursue reunification services with the offending parent or guardian.
(B)A finding of severe sexual abuse, for the purposes of this subdivision, may be based on, but is not limited to, sexual intercourse, or stimulation involving genital-genital, oral-genital, anal-genital, or oral-anal contact, whether between the parent or guardian and the child or a sibling or half sibling of the child, or between the child or a sibling or half sibling of the child and another person or animal with the actual or implied consent of the parent or guardian; or the penetration or manipulation of the childs, siblings, or half siblings genital organs or rectum by any animate or inanimate object for the sexual gratification of the parent or guardian, or for the sexual gratification of another person with the actual or implied consent of the parent or guardian.
(C)A finding of the infliction of severe physical harm, for the purposes of this subdivision, may be based on, but is not limited to, deliberate and serious injury inflicted to or on a childs body or the body of a sibling or half sibling of the child by an act or omission of the parent or guardian, or of another individual or animal with the consent of the parent or guardian; deliberate and torturous confinement of the child, sibling, or half sibling in a closed space; or any other torturous act or omission that would be reasonably understood to cause serious emotional damage.
(7)That the parent is not receiving reunification services for a sibling or a half sibling of the child pursuant to paragraph (3), (5), or (6).
(8)That the child was conceived by means of the commission of an offense listed in Section 288 or 288.5 of the Penal Code, or by an act committed outside of this state that, if committed in this state, would constitute one of those offenses. This paragraph only applies to the parent who committed the offense or act.
(9)That the child has been found to be a child described in subdivision (g) of Section 300; that the parent or guardian of the child willfully abandoned the child, and the court finds that the abandonment itself constituted a serious danger to the child; or that the parent or other person having custody of the child voluntarily surrendered physical custody of the child pursuant to Section 1255.7 of the Health and Safety Code. For the purposes of this paragraph, serious danger means that without the intervention of another person or agency, the child would have sustained severe or permanent disability, injury, illness, or death. For purposes of this paragraph, willful abandonment shall not be construed as actions taken in good faith by the parent without the intent of placing the child in serious danger.
(10)That the court ordered termination of reunification services for any siblings or half siblings of the child because the parent or guardian failed to reunify with the sibling or half sibling after the sibling or half sibling had been removed from that parent or guardian pursuant to Section 361 and that parent or guardian is the same parent or guardian described in subdivision (a) and that, according to the findings of the court, this parent or guardian has not subsequently made a reasonable effort to treat the problems that led to removal of the sibling or half sibling of that child from that parent or guardian.
(11)That the parental rights of a parent over any sibling or half sibling of the child had been permanently severed, and this parent is the same parent described in subdivision (a), and that, according to the findings of the court, this parent has not subsequently made a reasonable effort to treat the problems that led to removal of the sibling or half sibling of that child from the parent.
(12)That the parent or guardian of the child has been convicted of a violent felony, as defined in subdivision (c) of Section 667.5 of the Penal Code.
(13)That the parent or guardian of the child has a history of extensive, abusive, and chronic use of drugs or alcohol and has resisted prior court-ordered treatment for this problem during a three-year period immediately prior to the filing of the petition that brought that child to the courts attention, or has failed or refused to comply with a program of drug or alcohol treatment described in the case plan required by Section 358.1 on at least two prior occasions, even though the programs identified were available and accessible.
(14)(A)That the parent or guardian of the child has advised the court that he or she is not interested in receiving family maintenance or family reunification services or having the child returned to or placed in his or her custody and does not wish to receive family maintenance or reunification services.
(B)The parent or guardian shall be represented by counsel and shall execute a waiver of services form to be adopted by the Judicial Council. The court shall advise the parent or guardian of any right to services and of the possible consequences of a waiver of services, including the termination of parental rights and placement of the child for adoption. The court shall not accept the waiver of services unless it states on the record its finding that the parent or guardian has knowingly and intelligently waived the right to services.
(15)That the parent or guardian has on one or more occasions willfully abducted the child or childs sibling or half sibling from his or her placement and refused to disclose the childs or childs siblings or half siblings whereabouts, refused to return physical custody of the child or childs sibling or half sibling to his or her placement, or refused to return physical custody of the child or childs sibling or half sibling to the social worker.
(16)That the parent or guardian has been required by the court to be registered on a sex offender registry under the federal Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006 (42 U.S.C. Sec. 16913(a)), as required in Section 106(b)(2)(B)(xvi)(VI) of the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act of 2006 (42 U.S.C. Sec. 5106a(2)(B)(xvi)(VI)).
(17)That the parent or guardian participated in, or consented to, the sexual exploitation, as described in subdivision (c) of Section 11165.1 of the Penal Code, or human trafficking, as described in of, or subdivision (c) of Section 236.1 of of, the Penal Code, of the child. This shall not include instances in which the parent or guardian was also a victim of sexual exploitation or human trafficking and was coerced into consenting to, or participating in, the sexual exploitation or human trafficking of the child.
(c)(1)In deciding whether to order reunification in any case in which this section applies, the court shall hold a dispositional hearing. The social worker shall prepare a report that discusses whether reunification services shall be provided. When it is alleged, pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (b), that the parent is incapable of utilizing services due to mental disability, the court shall order reunification services unless competent evidence from mental health professionals establishes that, even with the provision of services, the parent is unlikely to be capable of adequately caring for the child within the time limits specified in subdivision (a).
(2)The court shall not order reunification for a parent or guardian described in paragraph (3), (4), (6), (7), (8), (9), (10), (11), (12), (13), (14), (15), (16), or (17) of subdivision (b) unless the court finds, by clear and convincing evidence, that reunification is in the best interest of the child.
(3)In addition, the court shall not order reunification in any situation described in paragraph (5) of subdivision (b) unless it finds that, based on competent testimony, those services are likely to prevent reabuse or continued neglect of the child or that failure to try reunification will be detrimental to the child because the child is closely and positively attached to that parent. The social worker shall investigate the circumstances leading to the removal of the child and advise the court whether there are circumstances that indicate that reunification is likely to be successful or unsuccessful and whether failure to order reunification is likely to be detrimental to the child.
(4)The failure of the parent to respond to previous services, the fact that the child was abused while the parent was under the influence of drugs or alcohol, a past history of violent behavior, or testimony by a competent professional that the parents behavior is unlikely to be changed by services are among the factors indicating that reunification services are unlikely to be successful. The fact that a parent or guardian is no longer living with an individual who severely abused the child may be considered in deciding that reunification services are likely to be successful, provided that the court shall consider any pattern of behavior on the part of the parent that has exposed the child to repeated abuse.
(d)If reunification services are not ordered pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (b) and the whereabouts of a parent become known within six months of the out-of-home placement of the child, the court shall order the social worker to provide family reunification services in accordance with this subdivision.
(e)(1)If the parent or guardian is incarcerated, institutionalized, or detained by the United States Department of Homeland Security, or has been deported to his or her country of origin, the court shall order reasonable services unless the court determines, by clear and convincing evidence, those services would be detrimental to the child. In determining detriment, the court shall consider the age of the child, the degree of parent-child bonding, the length of the sentence, the length and nature of the treatment, the nature of the crime or illness, the degree of detriment to the child if services are not offered and, for children 10 years of age or older, the childs attitude toward the implementation of family reunification services, the likelihood of the parents discharge from incarceration, institutionalization, or detention within the reunification time limitations described in subdivision (a), and any other appropriate factors. In determining the content of reasonable services, the court shall consider the particular barriers to an incarcerated, institutionalized, detained, or deported parents access to those court-mandated services and ability to maintain contact with his or her child, and shall document this information in the childs case plan. Reunification services are subject to the applicable time limitations imposed in subdivision (a). Services may include, but shall not be limited to, all of the following:
(A)Maintaining contact between the parent and child through collect telephone calls.
(B)Transportation services, where appropriate.
(C)Visitation services, where appropriate.
(D)(i)Reasonable services to extended family members or foster parents providing care for the child if the services are not detrimental to the child.
(ii)An incarcerated or detained parent may be required to attend counseling, parenting classes, or vocational training programs as part of the reunification service plan if actual access to these services is provided. The social worker shall document in the childs case plan the particular barriers to an incarcerated, institutionalized, or detained parents access to those court-mandated services and ability to maintain contact with his or her child.
(E)Reasonable efforts to assist parents who have been deported to contact child welfare authorities in their country of origin, to identify any available services that would substantially comply with case plan requirements, to document the parents participation in those services, and to accept reports from local child welfare authorities as to the parents living situation, progress, and participation in services.
(2)The presiding judge of the juvenile court of each county may convene representatives of the county welfare department, the sheriffs department, and other appropriate entities for the purpose of developing and entering into protocols for ensuring the notification, transportation, and presence of an incarcerated or institutionalized parent at all court hearings involving proceedings affecting the child pursuant to Section 2625 of the Penal Code. The county welfare department shall utilize the prisoner locator system developed by the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to facilitate timely and effective notice of hearings for incarcerated parents.
(3)Notwithstanding any other law, if the incarcerated parent is a woman seeking to participate in the community treatment program operated by the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation pursuant to Chapter 4.8 (commencing with Section 1174) of Title 7 of Part 2 of, Chapter 4 (commencing with Section 3410) of Title 2 of Part 3 of, the Penal Code, the court shall determine whether the parents participation in a program is in the childs best interest and whether it is suitable to meet the needs of the parent and child.
(f)If the court, pursuant to paragraph (2), (3), (4), (5), (6), (7), (8), (9), (10), (11), (12), (13), (14), (15), (16), or (17) of subdivision (b) or paragraph (1) of subdivision (e), does not order reunification services, it shall, at the dispositional hearing, that shall include a permanency hearing, determine if a hearing under Section 366.26 shall be set in order to determine whether adoption, guardianship, or long-term foster care, or in the case of an Indian child, in consultation with the childs tribe, tribal customary adoption, is the most appropriate plan for the child, and shall consider in-state and out-of-state placement options. If the court so determines, it shall conduct the hearing pursuant to Section 366.26 within 120 days after the dispositional hearing. However, the court shall not schedule a hearing so long as the other parent is being provided reunification services pursuant to subdivision (a). The court may continue to permit the parent to visit the child unless it finds that visitation would be detrimental to the child.
(g)(1)Whenever a court orders that a hearing shall be held pursuant to Section 366.26, including, when, in consultation with the childs tribe, tribal customary adoption is recommended, it shall direct the agency supervising the child and the county adoption agency, or the State Department of Social Services when it is acting as an adoption agency, to prepare an assessment that shall include:
(A)Current search efforts for an absent parent or parents and notification of a noncustodial parent in the manner provided for in Section 291.
(B)A review of the amount of and nature of any contact between the child and his or her parents and other members of his or her extended family since the time of placement. Although the extended family of each child shall be reviewed on a case-by-case basis, extended family for the purpose of this subparagraph shall include, but not be limited to, the childs siblings, grandparents, aunts, and uncles.
(C)An evaluation of the childs medical, developmental, scholastic, mental, and emotional status.
(D)A preliminary assessment of the eligibility and commitment of any identified prospective adoptive parent or guardian, including a prospective tribal customary adoptive parent, particularly the caretaker, to include a social history, including screening for criminal records and prior referrals for child abuse or neglect, the capability to meet the childs needs, and the understanding of the legal and financial rights and responsibilities of adoption and guardianship. If a proposed guardian is a relative of the minor, the assessment shall also consider, but need not be limited to, all of the factors specified in subdivision (a) of Section 361.3 and in Section 361.4. As used in this subparagraph, relative means an adult who is related to the minor by blood, adoption, or affinity within the fifth degree of kinship, including stepparents, stepsiblings, and all relatives whose status is preceded by the words great, great-great, or grand, or the spouse of any of those persons even if the marriage was terminated by death or dissolution. If the proposed permanent plan is guardianship with an approved relative caregiver for a minor eligible for aid under the Kin-GAP Program, as provided for in Article 4.7 (commencing with Section 11385) of Chapter 2 of Part 3 of Division 9, relative as used in this section has the same meaning as relative as defined in subdivision (c) of Section 11391.
(E)The relationship of the child to any identified prospective adoptive parent or guardian, including a prospective tribal customary parent, the duration and character of the relationship, the degree of attachment of the child to the prospective relative guardian or adoptive parent, the relatives or adoptive parents strong commitment to caring permanently for the child, the motivation for seeking adoption or guardianship, a statement from the child concerning placement and the adoption or guardianship, and whether the child over 12 years of age has been consulted about the proposed relative guardianship arrangements, unless the childs age or physical, emotional, or other condition precludes his or her meaningful response, and if so, a description of the condition.
(F)An analysis of the likelihood that the child will be adopted if parental rights are terminated.
(G)In the case of an Indian child, in addition to subparagraphs (A) to (F), inclusive, an assessment of the likelihood that the child will be adopted, when, in consultation with the childs tribe, a customary adoption, as defined in Section 366.24, is recommended. If tribal customary adoption is recommended, the assessment shall include an analysis of both of the following:
(i)Whether tribal customary adoption would or would not be detrimental to the Indian child and the reasons for reaching that conclusion.
(ii)Whether the Indian child cannot or should not be returned to the home of the Indian parent or Indian custodian and the reasons for reaching that conclusion.
(2)(A)A relative caregivers preference for legal guardianship over adoption, if it is due to circumstances that do not include an unwillingness to accept legal or financial responsibility for the child, shall not constitute the sole basis for recommending removal of the child from the relative caregiver for purposes of adoptive placement.
(B)Regardless of his or her immigration status, a relative caregiver shall be given information regarding the permanency options of guardianship and adoption, including the long-term benefits and consequences of each option, prior to establishing legal guardianship or pursuing adoption. If the proposed permanent plan is guardianship with an approved relative caregiver for a minor eligible for aid under the Kin-GAP Program, as provided for in Article 4.7 (commencing with Section 11385) of Chapter 2 of Part 3 of Division 9, the relative caregiver shall be informed about the terms and conditions of the negotiated agreement pursuant to Section 11387 and shall agree to its execution prior to the hearing held pursuant to Section 366.26. A copy of the executed negotiated agreement shall be attached to the assessment.
(h)If, at any hearing held pursuant to Section 366.26, a guardianship is established for the minor with an approved relative caregiver and juvenile court dependency is subsequently dismissed, the minor shall be eligible for aid under the Kin-GAP Program as provided for in Article 4.5 (commencing with Section 11360) or Article 4.7 (commencing with Section 11385), as applicable, of Chapter 2 of Part 3 of Division 9.
(i)In determining whether reunification services will benefit the child pursuant to paragraph (6) or (7) of subdivision (b), the court shall consider any information it deems relevant, including the following factors:
(1)The specific act or omission comprising the severe sexual abuse or the severe physical harm inflicted on the child or the childs sibling or half sibling.
(2)The circumstances under which the abuse or harm was inflicted on the child or the childs sibling or half sibling.
(3)The severity of the emotional trauma suffered by the child or the childs sibling or half sibling.
(4)Any history of abuse of other children by the offending parent or guardian.
(5)The likelihood that the child may be safely returned to the care of the offending parent or guardian within 12 months with no continuing supervision.
(6)Whether or not the child desires to be reunified with the offending parent or guardian.
(j)When the court determines that reunification services will not be ordered, it shall order that the childs caregiver receive the childs birth certificate in accordance with Sections 16010.4 and 16010.5. Additionally, when the court determines that reunification services will not be ordered, it shall order, when appropriate, that a child who is 16 years of age or older receive his or her birth certificate.
(k)The court shall read into the record the basis for a finding of severe sexual abuse or the infliction of severe physical harm under paragraph (6) of subdivision (b), and shall also specify the factual findings used to determine that the provision of reunification services to the offending parent or guardian would not benefit the child.
(a)Except as provided in subdivision (b), or when the parent has voluntarily relinquished the child and the relinquishment has been filed with the State Department of Social Services, or upon the establishment of an order of guardianship pursuant to Section 360, or when a court adjudicates a petition under Section 329 to modify the courts jurisdiction from delinquency jurisdiction to dependency jurisdiction pursuant to subparagraph (A) of paragraph (2) of subdivision (b) of Section 607.2 and the parents or guardian of the ward have had reunification services terminated under the delinquency jurisdiction, whenever a child is removed from a parents or guardians custody, the juvenile court shall order the social worker to provide child welfare services to the child and the childs mother and statutorily presumed father or guardians. Upon a finding and declaration of paternity by the juvenile court or proof of a prior declaration of paternity by any court of competent jurisdiction, the juvenile court may order services for the child and the biological father, if the court determines that the services will benefit the child.
(1)Family reunification services, when provided, shall be provided as follows:
(A)Except as otherwise provided in subparagraph (C), for a child who, on the date of initial removal from the physical custody of his or her parent or guardian, was three years of age or older, court-ordered services shall be provided beginning with the dispositional hearing and ending 12 months after the date the child entered foster care as provided in Section 361.49, unless the child is returned to the home of the parent or guardian.
(B)For a child who, on the date of initial removal from the physical custody of his or her parent or guardian, was under three years of age, court-ordered services shall be provided for a period of six months from the dispositional hearing as provided in subdivision (e) of Section 366.21, but no longer than 12 months from the date the child entered foster care as provided in Section 361.49 unless the child is returned to the home of the parent or guardian.
(C)For the purpose of placing and maintaining a sibling group together in a permanent home should reunification efforts fail, for a child in a sibling group whose members were removed from parental custody at the same time, and in which one member of the sibling group was under three years of age on the date of initial removal from the physical custody of his or her parent or guardian, court-ordered services for some or all of the sibling group may be limited as set forth in subparagraph (B). For the purposes of this paragraph, a sibling group shall mean two or more children who are related to each other as full or half siblings.
(2)Any motion to terminate court-ordered reunification services prior to the hearing set pursuant to subdivision (f) of Section 366.21 for a child described by subparagraph (A) of paragraph (1), or prior to the hearing set pursuant to subdivision (e) of Section 366.21 for a child described by subparagraph (B) or (C) of paragraph (1), shall be made pursuant to the requirements set forth in subdivision (c) of Section 388. A motion to terminate court-ordered reunification services shall not be required at the hearing set pursuant to subdivision (e) of Section 366.21 if the court finds by clear and convincing evidence one of the following:
(A)That the child was removed initially under subdivision (g) of Section 300 and the whereabouts of the parent are still unknown.
(B)That the parent has failed to contact and visit the child.
(C)That the parent has been convicted of a felony indicating parental unfitness.
(3)(A)Notwithstanding subparagraphs (A), (B), and (C) of paragraph (1), court-ordered services may be extended up to a maximum time period not to exceed 18 months after the date the child was originally removed from physical custody of his or her parent or guardian if it can be shown, at the hearing held pursuant to subdivision (f) of Section 366.21, that the permanent plan for the child is that he or she will be returned and safely maintained in the home within the extended time period. The court shall extend the time period only if it finds that there is a substantial probability that the child will be returned to the physical custody of his or her parent or guardian within the extended time period or that reasonable services have not been provided to the parent or guardian. In determining whether court-ordered services may be extended, the court shall consider the special circumstances of an incarcerated or institutionalized parent or parents, parent or parents court-ordered to a residential substance abuse treatment program, or a parent who has been arrested and issued an immigration hold, detained by the United States Department of Homeland Security, or deported to his or her country of origin, including, but not limited to, barriers to the parents or guardians access to services and ability to maintain contact with his or her child. The court shall also consider, among other factors, good faith efforts that the parent or guardian has made to maintain contact with the child. If the court extends the time period, the court shall specify the factual basis for its conclusion that there is a substantial probability that the child will be returned to the physical custody of his or her parent or guardian within the extended time period. The court also shall make findings pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 366 and subdivision (e) of Section 358.1.
When
(B)When counseling or other treatment services are ordered, the parent or guardian shall be ordered to participate in those services, unless the parents or guardians participation is deemed by the court to be inappropriate or potentially detrimental to the child, or unless a parent or guardian is incarcerated of detained by the United States Department of Homeland Security and the corrections facility in which he or she is incarcerated does not provide access to the treatment services ordered by the court, or has been deported to his or her country of origin and services ordered by the court are not accessible in that country. Physical custody of the child by the parents or guardians during the applicable time period under subparagraph (A), (B), or (C) of paragraph (1) shall not serve to interrupt the running of the time period. If at the end of the applicable time period, a child cannot be safely returned to the care and custody of a parent or guardian without court supervision, but the child clearly desires contact with the parent or guardian, the court shall take the childs desire into account in devising a permanency plan.
In
(C)In cases where the child was under three years of age on the date of the initial removal from the physical custody of his or her parent or guardian or is a member of a sibling group as described in subparagraph (C) of paragraph (1), the court shall inform the parent or guardian that the failure of the parent or guardian to participate regularly in any court-ordered treatment programs or to cooperate or avail himself or herself of services provided as part of the child welfare services case plan may result in a termination of efforts to reunify the family after six months. The court shall inform the parent or guardian of the factors used in subdivision (e) of Section 366.21 to determine whether to limit services to six months for some or all members of a sibling group as described in subparagraph (C) of paragraph (1).
(4)(A)Notwithstanding paragraph (3), court-ordered services may be extended up to a maximum time period not to exceed 24 months after the date the child was originally removed from physical custody of his or her parent or guardian if it is shown, at the hearing held pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 366.22, that the permanent plan for the child is that he or she will be returned and safely maintained in the home within the extended time period. The court shall extend the time period only if it finds that it is in the childs best interest to have the time period extended and that there is a substantial probability that the child will be returned to the physical custody of his or her parent or guardian who is described in subdivision (b) of Section 366.22 within the extended time period, or that reasonable services have not been provided to the parent or guardian. If the court extends the time period, the court shall specify the factual basis for its conclusion that there is a substantial probability that the child will be returned to the physical custody of his or her parent or guardian within the extended time period. The court also shall make findings pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 366 and subdivision (e) of Section 358.1.
When
(B)When counseling or other treatment services are ordered, the parent or guardian shall be ordered to participate in those services, in order for substantial probability to be found. Physical custody of the child by the parents or guardians during the applicable time period under subparagraph (A), (B), or (C) of paragraph (1) shall not serve to interrupt the running of the time period. If at the end of the applicable time period, the child cannot be safely returned to the care and custody of a parent or guardian without court supervision, but the child clearly desires contact with the parent or guardian, the court shall take the childs desire into account in devising a permanency plan.
Except
(C)Except in cases where, pursuant to subdivision (b), the court does not order reunification services, the court shall inform the parent or parents of Section 366.26 and shall specify that the parents or parents parental rights may be terminated.
(b)Reunification services need not be provided to a parent or guardian described in this subdivision when the court finds, by clear and convincing evidence, any of the following:
(1)That the whereabouts of the parent or guardian is unknown. A finding pursuant to this paragraph shall be supported by an affidavit or by proof that a reasonably diligent search has failed to locate the parent or guardian. The posting or publication of notices is not required in that search.
(2)That the parent or guardian is suffering from a mental disability that is described in Chapter 2 (commencing with Section 7820) of Part 4 of Division 12 of the Family Code and that renders him or her incapable of utilizing those services.
(3)That the child or a sibling of the child has been previously adjudicated a dependent pursuant to any subdivision of Section 300 as a result of physical or sexual abuse, that following that adjudication the child had been removed from the custody of his or her parent or guardian pursuant to Section 361, that the child has been returned to the custody of the parent or guardian from whom the child had been taken originally, and that the child is being removed pursuant to Section 361, due to additional physical or sexual abuse.
(4)That the parent or guardian of the child has caused the death of another child through abuse or neglect.
(5)That the child was brought within the jurisdiction of the court under subdivision (e) of Section 300 because of the conduct of that parent or guardian.
(6)(A)That the child has been adjudicated a dependent pursuant to any subdivision of Section 300 as a result of severe sexual abuse or the infliction of severe physical harm to the child, a sibling, or a half sibling by a parent or guardian, as defined in this subdivision, and the court makes a factual finding that it would not benefit the child to pursue reunification services with the offending parent or guardian.
A
(B)A finding of severe sexual abuse, for the purposes of this subdivision, may be based on, but is not limited to, sexual intercourse, or stimulation involving genital-genital, oral-genital, anal-genital, or oral-anal contact, whether between the parent or guardian and the child or a sibling or half sibling of the child, or between the child or a sibling or half sibling of the child and another person or animal with the actual or implied consent of the parent or guardian; or the penetration or manipulation of the childs, siblings, or half siblings genital organs or rectum by any animate or inanimate object for the sexual gratification of the parent or guardian, or for the sexual gratification of another person with the actual or implied consent of the parent or guardian.
A
(C)A finding of the infliction of severe physical harm, for the purposes of this subdivision, may be based on, but is not limited to, deliberate and serious injury inflicted to or on a childs body or the body of a sibling or half sibling of the child by an act or omission of the parent or guardian, or of another individual or animal with the consent of the parent or guardian; deliberate and torturous confinement of the child, sibling, or half sibling in a closed space; or any other torturous act or omission that would be reasonably understood to cause serious emotional damage.
(7)That the parent is not receiving reunification services for a sibling or a half sibling of the child pursuant to paragraph (3), (5), or (6).
(8)That the child was conceived by means of the commission of an offense listed in Section 288 or 288.5 of the Penal Code, or by an act committed outside of this state that, if committed in this state, would constitute one of those offenses. This paragraph only applies to the parent who committed the offense or act.
(9)That the child has been found to be a child described in subdivision (g) of Section 300; that the parent or guardian of the child willfully abandoned the child, and the court finds that the abandonment itself constituted a serious danger to the child; or that the parent or other person having custody of the child voluntarily surrendered physical custody of the child pursuant to Section 1255.7 of the Health and Safety Code. For the purposes of this paragraph, serious danger means that without the intervention of another person or agency, the child would have sustained severe or permanent disability, injury, illness, or death. For purposes of this paragraph, willful abandonment shall not be construed as actions taken in good faith by the parent without the intent of placing the child in serious danger.
(10)That the court ordered termination of reunification services for any siblings or half siblings of the child because the parent or guardian failed to reunify with the sibling or half sibling after the sibling or half sibling had been removed from that parent or guardian pursuant to Section 361 and that parent or guardian is the same parent or guardian described in subdivision (a) and that, according to the findings of the court, this parent or guardian has not subsequently made a reasonable effort to treat the problems that led to removal of the sibling or half sibling of that child from that parent or guardian.
(11)That the parental rights of a parent over any sibling or half sibling of the child had been permanently severed, and this parent is the same parent described in subdivision (a), and that, according to the findings of the court, this parent has not subsequently made a reasonable effort to treat the problems that led to removal of the sibling or half sibling of that child from the parent.
(12)That the parent or guardian of the child has been convicted of a violent felony, as defined in subdivision (c) of Section 667.5 of the Penal Code.
(13)That the parent or guardian of the child has a history of extensive, abusive, and chronic use of drugs or alcohol and has resisted prior court-ordered treatment for this problem during a three-year period immediately prior to the filing of the petition that brought that child to the courts attention, or has failed or refused to comply with a program of drug or alcohol treatment described in the case plan required by Section 358.1 on at least two prior occasions, even though the programs identified were available and accessible.
(14)(A)That the parent or guardian of the child has advised the court that he or she is not interested in receiving family maintenance or family reunification services or having the child returned to or placed in his or her custody and does not wish to receive family maintenance or reunification services.
The
(B)The parent or guardian shall be represented by counsel and shall execute a waiver of services form to be adopted by the Judicial Council. The court shall advise the parent or guardian of any right to services and of the possible consequences of a waiver of services, including the termination of parental rights and placement of the child for adoption. The court shall not accept the waiver of services unless it states on the record its finding that the parent or guardian has knowingly and intelligently waived the right to services.
(15)That the parent or guardian has on one or more occasions willfully abducted the child or childs sibling or half sibling from his or her placement and refused to disclose the childs or childs siblings or half siblings whereabouts, refused to return physical custody of the child or childs sibling or half sibling to his or her placement, or refused to return physical custody of the child or childs sibling or half sibling to the social worker.
(16)That the parent or guardian has been required by the court to be registered on a sex offender registry under the federal Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006 (42 U.S.C. Sec. 16913(a)), as required in Section 106(b)(2)(B)(xvi)(VI) of the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act of 2006 (42 U.S.C. Sec. 5106a(2)(B)(xvi)(VI)).
(17)That the parent or guardian participated in, or consented to, the sexual exploitation, as described in Section 11165.1 of the Penal Code, or human trafficking, as described in Section 236.1 of the Penal Code, of the child. This shall not include instances in which the parent or guardian was also a victim of sexual exploitation or human trafficking and was coerced into consenting to, or participating in, the sexual exploitation or human trafficking of the child.
(c)(1)In deciding whether to order reunification in any case in which this section applies, the court shall hold a dispositional hearing. The social worker shall prepare a report that discusses whether reunification services shall be provided. When it is alleged, pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (b), that the parent is incapable of utilizing services due to mental disability, the court shall order reunification services unless competent evidence from mental health professionals establishes that, even with the provision of services, the parent is unlikely to be capable of adequately caring for the child within the time limits specified in subdivision (a).
The
(2)The court shall not order reunification for a parent or guardian described in paragraph (3), (4), (6), (7), (8), (9), (10), (11), (12), (13), (14), (15), or (16) (16), or (17) of subdivision (b) unless the court finds, by clear and convincing evidence, that reunification is in the best interest of the child.
In
(3)In addition, the court shall not order reunification in any situation described in paragraph (5) of subdivision (b) unless it finds that, based on competent testimony, those services are likely to prevent reabuse or continued neglect of the child or that failure to try reunification will be detrimental to the child because the child is closely and positively attached to that parent. The social worker shall investigate the circumstances leading to the removal of the child and advise the court whether there are circumstances that indicate that reunification is likely to be successful or unsuccessful and whether failure to order reunification is likely to be detrimental to the child.
The
(4)The failure of the parent to respond to previous services, the fact that the child was abused while the parent was under the influence of drugs or alcohol, a past history of violent behavior, or testimony by a competent professional that the parents behavior is unlikely to be changed by services are among the factors indicating that reunification services are unlikely to be successful. The fact that a parent or guardian is no longer living with an individual who severely abused the child may be considered in deciding that reunification services are likely to be successful, provided that the court shall consider any pattern of behavior on the part of the parent that has exposed the child to repeated abuse.
(d)If reunification services are not ordered pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (b) and the whereabouts of a parent become known within six months of the out-of-home placement of the child, the court shall order the social worker to provide family reunification services in accordance with this subdivision.
(e)(1)If the parent or guardian is incarcerated, institutionalized, or detained by the United States Department of Homeland Security, or has been deported to his or her country of origin, the court shall order reasonable services unless the court determines, by clear and convincing evidence, those services would be detrimental to the child. In determining detriment, the court shall consider the age of the child, the degree of parent-child bonding, the length of the sentence, the length and nature of the treatment, the nature of the crime or illness, the degree of detriment to the child if services are not offered and, for children 10 years of age or older, the childs attitude toward the implementation of family reunification services, the likelihood of the parents discharge from incarceration, institutionalization, or detention within the reunification time limitations described in subdivision (a), and any other appropriate factors. In determining the content of reasonable services, the court shall consider the particular barriers to an incarcerated, institutionalized, detained, or deported parents access to those court-mandated services and ability to maintain contact with his or her child, and shall document this information in the childs case plan. Reunification services are subject to the applicable time limitations imposed in subdivision (a). Services may include, but shall not be limited to, all of the following:
(A)Maintaining contact between the parent and child through collect telephone calls.
(B)Transportation services, where appropriate.
(C)Visitation services, where appropriate.
(D)(i)Reasonable services to extended family members or foster parents providing care for the child if the services are not detrimental to the child.
An
(ii)An incarcerated or detained parent may be required to attend counseling, parenting classes, or vocational training programs as part of the reunification service plan if actual access to these services is provided. The social worker shall document in the childs case plan the particular barriers to an incarcerated, institutionalized, or detained parents access to those court-mandated services and ability to maintain contact with his or her child.
(E)Reasonable efforts to assist parents who have been deported to contact child welfare authorities in their country of origin, to identify any available services that would substantially comply with case plan requirements, to document the parents participation in those services, and to accept reports from local child welfare authorities as to the parents living situation, progress, and participation in services.
(2)The presiding judge of the juvenile court of each county may convene representatives of the county welfare department, the sheriffs department, and other appropriate entities for the purpose of developing and entering into protocols for ensuring the notification, transportation, and presence of an incarcerated or institutionalized parent at all court hearings involving proceedings affecting the child pursuant to Section 2625 of the Penal Code. The county welfare department shall utilize the prisoner locator system developed by the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to facilitate timely and effective notice of hearings for incarcerated parents.
(3)Notwithstanding any other provision of law, if the incarcerated parent is a woman seeking to participate in the community treatment program operated by the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation pursuant to Chapter 4.8 (commencing with Section 1174) of Title 7 of Part 2 of, Chapter 4 (commencing with Section 3410) of Title 2 of Part 3 of, the Penal Code, the court shall determine whether the parents participation in a program is in the childs best interest and whether it is suitable to meet the needs of the parent and child.
(f)If the court, pursuant to paragraph (2), (3), (4), (5), (6), (7), (8), (9), (10), (11), (12), (13), (14), (15), or (16) (16), or (17) of subdivision (b) or paragraph (1) of subdivision (e), does not order reunification services, it shall, at the dispositional hearing, that shall include a permanency hearing, determine if a hearing under Section 366.26 shall be set in order to determine whether adoption, guardianship, or long-term foster care, or in the case of an Indian child, in consultation with the childs tribe, tribal customary adoption, is the most appropriate plan for the child, and shall consider in-state and out-of-state placement options. If the court so determines, it shall conduct the hearing pursuant to Section 366.26 within 120 days after the dispositional hearing. However, the court shall not schedule a hearing so long as the other parent is being provided reunification services pursuant to subdivision (a). The court may continue to permit the parent to visit the child unless it finds that visitation would be detrimental to the child.
(g)(1)Whenever a court orders that a hearing shall be held pursuant to Section 366.26, including, when, in consultation with the childs tribe, tribal customary adoption is recommended, it shall direct the agency supervising the child and the county adoption agency, or the State Department of Social Services when it is acting as an adoption agency, to prepare an assessment that shall include:
(A)Current search efforts for an absent parent or parents and notification of a noncustodial parent in the manner provided for in Section 291.
(B)A review of the amount of and nature of any contact between the child and his or her parents and other members of his or her extended family since the time of placement. Although the extended family of each child shall be reviewed on a case-by-case basis, extended family for the purpose of this subparagraph shall include, but not be limited to, the childs siblings, grandparents, aunts, and uncles.
(C)An evaluation of the childs medical, developmental, scholastic, mental, and emotional status.
(D)A preliminary assessment of the eligibility and commitment of any identified prospective adoptive parent or guardian, including a prospective tribal customary adoptive parent, particularly the caretaker, to include a social history, including screening for criminal records and prior referrals for child abuse or neglect, the capability to meet the childs needs, and the understanding of the legal and financial rights and responsibilities of adoption and guardianship. If a proposed guardian is a relative of the minor, the assessment shall also consider, but need not be limited to, all of the factors specified in subdivision (a) of Section 361.3 and in Section 361.4. As used in this subparagraph, relative means an adult who is related to the minor by blood, adoption, or affinity within the fifth degree of kinship, including stepparents, stepsiblings, and all relatives whose status is preceded by the words great, great-great, or grand, or the spouse of any of those persons even if the marriage was terminated by death or dissolution. If the proposed permanent plan is guardianship with an approved relative caregiver for a minor eligible for aid under the Kin-GAP Program, as provided for in Article 4.7 (commencing with Section 11385) of Chapter 2 of Part 3 of Division 9, relative as used in this section has the same meaning as relative as defined in subdivision (c) of Section 11391.
(E)The relationship of the child to any identified prospective adoptive parent or guardian, including a prospective tribal customary parent, the duration and character of the relationship, the degree of attachment of the child to the prospective relative guardian or adoptive parent, the relatives or adoptive parents strong commitment to caring permanently for the child, the motivation for seeking adoption or guardianship, a statement from the child concerning placement and the adoption or guardianship, and whether the child over 12 years of age has been consulted about the proposed relative guardianship arrangements, unless the childs age or physical, emotional, or other condition precludes his or her meaningful response, and if so, a description of the condition.
(F)An analysis of the likelihood that the child will be adopted if parental rights are terminated.
(G)In the case of an Indian child, in addition to subparagraphs (A) to (F), inclusive, an assessment of the likelihood that the child will be adopted, when, in consultation with the childs tribe, a customary adoption, as defined in Section 366.24, is recommended. If tribal customary adoption is recommended, the assessment shall include an analysis of both of the following:
(i)Whether tribal customary adoption would or would not be detrimental to the Indian child and the reasons for reaching that conclusion.
(ii)Whether the Indian child cannot or should not be returned to the home of the Indian parent or Indian custodian and the reasons for reaching that conclusion.
(2)(A)A relative caregivers preference for legal guardianship over adoption, if it is due to circumstances that do not include an unwillingness to accept legal or financial responsibility for the child, shall not constitute the sole basis for recommending removal of the child from the relative caregiver for purposes of adoptive placement.
(B)Regardless of his or her immigration status, a relative caregiver shall be given information regarding the permanency options of guardianship and adoption, including the long-term benefits and consequences of each option, prior to establishing legal guardianship or pursuing adoption. If the proposed permanent plan is guardianship with an approved relative caregiver for a minor eligible for aid under the Kin-GAP Program, as provided for in Article 4.7 (commencing with Section 11385) of Chapter 2 of Part 3 of Division 9, the relative caregiver shall be informed about the terms and conditions of the negotiated agreement pursuant to Section 11387 and shall agree to its execution prior to the hearing held pursuant to Section 366.26. A copy of the executed negotiated agreement shall be attached to the assessment.
(h)If, at any hearing held pursuant to Section 366.26, a guardianship is established for the minor with an approved relative caregiver and juvenile court dependency is subsequently dismissed, the minor shall be eligible for aid under the Kin-GAP Program as provided for in Article 4.5 (commencing with Section 11360) or Article 4.7 (commencing with Section 11385), as applicable, of Chapter 2 of Part 3 of Division 9, as applicable. 9.
(i)In determining whether reunification services will benefit the child pursuant to paragraph (6) or (7) of subdivision (b), the court shall consider any information it deems relevant, including the following factors:
(1)The specific act or omission comprising the severe sexual abuse or the severe physical harm inflicted on the child or the childs sibling or half sibling.
(2)The circumstances under which the abuse or harm was inflicted on the child or the childs sibling or half sibling.
(3)The severity of the emotional trauma suffered by the child or the childs sibling or half sibling.
(4)Any history of abuse of other children by the offending parent or guardian.
(5)The likelihood that the child may be safely returned to the care of the offending parent or guardian within 12 months with no continuing supervision.
(6)Whether or not the child desires to be reunified with the offending parent or guardian.
(j)When the court determines that reunification services will not be ordered, it shall order that the childs caregiver receive the childs birth certificate in accordance with Sections 16010.4 and 16010.5. Additionally, when the court determines that reunification services will not be ordered, it shall order, when appropriate, that a child who is 16 years of age or older receive his or her birth certificate.
(k)The court shall read into the record the basis for a finding of severe sexual abuse or the infliction of severe physical harm under paragraph (6) of subdivision (b), and shall also specify the factual findings used to determine that the provision of reunification services to the offending parent or guardian would not benefit the child.
|
Date
|
Status
|
|---|---|
| May 2, 2016 | Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. |
| Aug 17, 2016 | Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 124, Statutes of 2016. |
| Aug 17, 2016 | Approved by the Governor. |
| Aug 5, 2016 | Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 2:30 p.m. |
| Aug 1, 2016 | Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 76. Noes 0. Page 5636.). |
| Aug 1, 2016 | Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. |
| Jun 30, 2016 | Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly. (Ayes 37. Noes 0. Page 4646.). |
| Jun 30, 2016 | Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly. |
| Jun 30, 2016 | In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending. May be considered on or after July 30 pursuant to Assembly Rule 77. |
| Jun 30, 2016 | In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending. May be considered on or after July 29 pursuant to Assembly Rule 77. |
| Jun 16, 2016 | Read second time and amended. Ordered to consent calendar. |
| Jun 15, 2016 | From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended. To Consent Calendar. (Ayes 7. Noes 0.) (June 14). |
| May 12, 2016 | Referred to Com. on JUD. |
| May 2, 2016 | Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 76. Noes 0. Page 4624.) |
| Jan 25, 2016 | Read first time. To print. |
| May 2, 2016 | In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. |
| Apr 28, 2016 | Read second time. Ordered to third reading. |
| Apr 27, 2016 | From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 6. Noes 0.) (April 26). |
| Apr 12, 2016 | In committee: Hearing postponed by committee. |
| Mar 17, 2016 | Re-referred to Com. on HUM. S. |
| Mar 16, 2016 | Read second time and amended. |
| Mar 15, 2016 | From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on HUM. S. with recommendation: To Consent Calendar. (Ayes 8. Noes 0.) (March 15). |
| Mar 8, 2016 | Re-referred to Com. on JUD. |
| Mar 7, 2016 | From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on JUD. Read second time and amended. |
| Feb 25, 2016 | Re-referred to Coms. on JUD. and HUM. S. pursuant to Assembly Rule 96. |
| Feb 18, 2016 | Referred to Coms. on HUM. S. and JUD. |
| Jan 26, 2016 | From printer. May be heard in committee February 25. |
|
Date
|
Description
|
Location
|
Votes
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 1, 2016 | AB 1702 STONE Concurrence in Senate Amendments | Assembly Floor |
Passed |
|
| Jun 30, 2016 | Consent Calendar 2nd AB1702 Mark Stone | Senate Floor |
Passed |
|
| Jun 14, 2016 | Do pass as amended, and be ordered to the Consent Calendar | Senate Standing Committee on Judiciary |
Passed |
|
| May 2, 2016 | AB 1702 STONE Assembly Third Reading | Assembly Floor |
Passed |
|
| Apr 26, 2016 | Do pass. | Assembly Standing Committee on Human Services |
Passed |
|
| Mar 15, 2016 | Do pass as amended, and be re-referred to the Committee on [Human Services] with recommendation: To Consent Calendar | Assembly Standing Committee on Judiciary |
Passed |
This list shows positions taken on this bill by organizations on the date displayed, which is linked to the original source.
Positions by individuals are not included.
|
Organization
|
Position
|
Date
|
|---|---|---|
| Alameda County - co sponsor | ** Support | Apr 26, 2016 |
| Alameda County Social Services Agency - co-sponsor | ** Support | Apr 26, 2016 |
| American Academy of Pediatrics | ** Support | Aug 1, 2016 |
| Butte County Department of Emergency and Social Services | ** Support | Apr 26, 2016 |
| Butte County Department of Employment and Social Services | ** Support | Aug 1, 2016 |
| California Association Of Marriage And Family Therapists | ** Support | Aug 1, 2016 |
| California Catholic Conference | ** Support | Aug 1, 2016 |
| California Coalition For Youth | ** Support | Aug 1, 2016 |
| California Immigrant Policy Center | ** Support | Aug 1, 2016 |
| California Police Chiefs Association | ** Support | Aug 1, 2016 |
| California Probation, Parole, and Correctional Association | ** Support | Aug 1, 2016 |
| California State Association Of Counties | ** Support | Aug 1, 2016 |
| County Of Alameda | ** Support | Aug 1, 2016 |
| County Of Madera | ** Support | Aug 1, 2016 |
| County of Madera Department of Social Services | ** Support | Apr 26, 2016 |
| County of San Bernardino | ** Support | Aug 1, 2016 |
| County Welfare Directors Association of California | ** Support | Aug 1, 2016 |
| Legal Services for Prisoners with Children | ** Against | Aug 1, 2016 |
| LIUNA Locals 777 & 972 | ** Support | Aug 1, 2016 |
| Los Angeles Professional Peace Officers Association | ** Support | Aug 1, 2016 |
| National Association of Social Workers | ** Support | Aug 1, 2016 |
| Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors | ** Support | Aug 1, 2016 |
| Urban Counties of California | ** Support | Aug 1, 2016 |
| Ventura County Board of Supervisors | ** Support | Aug 1, 2016 |
CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS
CSA1 Bill Id:AB 1702
Author:(Mark Stone and Maienschein)
As Amended Ver:June 16, 2016
Majority vote
ASSEMBLY: | 76-0 | (May 2, 2016) | SENATE: | 37-0 | (June 30, 2016) |
Original Committee Reference: HUM. S.
SUMMARY: Expands the court's ability to deny reunification services to the parent or guardian of a dependent child to include instances in which the court finds, by clear and convincing evidence, that the parent or guardian has knowingly participated in or permitted the child's sexual exploitation, as specified.
The Senate amendments:
- Clarify that the provisions of this bill pertain to those parents who knowingly participate in or permit the sexual exploitation of a child.
- Clarify that instances in which a parent or guardian who adequately demonstrates by a preponderance of the evidence that he or she was coerced into permitting or participating in the sexual exploitation of the child are not subject to the provisions of this bill.
EXISTING LAW:
- Establishes that the purpose of the dependency system is the maximum safety and protection of children who are currently being abused, neglected, or exploited. Provides that the focus is on the preservation of the family, as well as the safety, protection, and physical and emotional well-being of the child. (Welfare and Institutions Code Section (WIC) 300.2)
- States the intent of the Legislature to preserve and strengthen a child's family ties whenever possible and to reunify a foster youth with his or her biological family whenever possible, or to provide a permanent placement alternative, such as adoption or guardianship. (WIC 16000)
- Requires the court, if at the initial hearing the juvenile court orders a child be removed from his or her parent or guardian due to abuse or neglect, to order that child welfare reunification services be provided to the family as soon as possible in order to reunify the child with his or her family, if appropriate. (WIC 319(e))
- Requires the court, at a dispositional hearing, to order a social worker to provide child welfare services to a child who has been removed from his or her parents' or guardians' custody and to the parents or guardians in order to support the goal of reunification, for a specified time period, except under certain circumstances. Provides that children and families in the child welfare system should typically receive a full six months of reunification services if the child is under three years of age, and twelve months if the child is over three years of age, but that may be extended up to 18 or 24 months, as provided. (WIC 361.5(a))
- Provides that reunification services need not be provided if the court finds, by clear and convincing evidence, that specified conditions exist, including:
- The parent or guardian is suffering from a mental disability that renders the parent incapable of using the reunification services;
- The parent or guardian has caused the death of another child through abuse or neglect;
- The child or a sibling has been adjudicated a dependent as the result of severe physical or sexual abuse;
- The parent or guardian has been convicted of a violent felony; and
- The parent or guardian has a history of drug or alcohol abuse and has failed to comply with treatment programs as provided. (WIC 361.5(b))
- Prevents the court from ordering reunification services for a parent or guardian in specified situations, unless the court finds that reunification is in the child's best interest. (WIC 361.5(c))
- Allows any party to petition the court to terminate reunification services early, and allows the court to terminate those services after finding, by clear and convincing evidence, that:
- Circumstances now exist that, had they previously existed, would have led the court to bypass or not order reunification services; or,
- The action or inaction of the parent or guardian creates a substantial likelihood that reunification will not occur, including but not limited to the parent's or guardian's failure to visit the child, or the failure to participate regularly and make substantive progress in a court-ordered treatment plan. (WIC 388(c))
- Defines "sexual exploitation" and "commercial sexual exploitation" of a child. (Penal Code Section (PEN) 11165.1 (c) and (d))
FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown. This bill is keyed non-fiscal by the Legislative Counsel.
COMMENTS:
Child Welfare Services: The purpose of California's Child Welfare Services (CWS) system is to protect children from abuse and neglect and provide for their health and safety. When children are identified as being at risk of abuse, neglect or abandonment, county juvenile courts hold legal dependency jurisdiction; these children are served by the CWS system through the appointment of a social worker. Through this juvenile dependency system, there are multiple opportunities for the custody of the child, or his or her placement outside of the home, to be evaluated, reviewed and determined by the judicial system, in consultation with the child's social worker, to help provide the best possible services to the child. The CWS system seeks to help children who have been removed from their homes reunify with their parents or guardians, whenever appropriate. However, the court may determine that an alternate permanent placement is more fitting; the court must give preference to potential placements in this order: relatives, nonrelative extended family members, or family foster homes. Placement in group homes or other intensive treatment placement settings are considered only in more challenging situations where a child may need stabilization services in order to transition to a less restrictive placement, such as with a relative or foster caregiver. There are currently close to 63,000 children and youth in California's CWS system.
Family reunification services: Because the intent of the dependency system is to, whenever possible, reunify children with their families, parents are often provided reunification services in order to safely reunify with their children in foster care. Reunification services often include efforts to address the circumstances under which a child was removed from their parent's custody, including drug and alcohol treatment, anger management counseling, or parenting classes. Currently reunification services may be denied to parents or guardians in order to protect the child from further harm, including a parent who: is a registered sex offender, has willfully abducted the child or a sibling, or has been convicted of a violent felony, among others.
Commercial Sexual Exploitation of Children (CSEC): Commercial sexual exploitation of children is defined as the sexual exploitation of children entirely, or at least primarily, for financial or other economic reasons. Under this definition, the economic exchanges may be either monetary or non-monetary (i.e., for food, shelter, drugs). Sex trafficking of minors is defined as the "recruitment, harboring, transportation, provision, or obtaining of a person for the purpose of a commercial sex act" where the person is a United States citizen or lawful permanent resident under the age of 18 years.
According to Department of Social Services (DSS), approximately 800,000 victims annually are trafficked across international borders worldwide, and between 14,500-17,500 of those victims are trafficked into the United States. Nearly 95% of CSEC victims in the United States are female, and it is estimated that between 50-80% of child victims of commercial sexual exploitation have been involved with the child welfare system, according to the National Center for Youth Law. According to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, it is estimated that one in six endangered runaways were likely sex trafficking victims in 2014. Many experts believe, however, that these statistics are underestimated; challenges arise when identifying victims, collecting and cross-referencing data, and deciding on common definitions in order to collect accurate statistics. Many youth also do not identify as victims or may be reluctant to admit to victimization due to fears of retaliation from traffickers, deportation, or incarceration by law enforcement.
Need for this bill: According to the author's office, "The sex trafficking of children is a serious problem in California; three metropolitan areas (San Francisco, Los Angeles, and San Diego) have been rated as 'high intensity child prostitution' areas by the FBI [Federal Bureau of Investigation]. Particularly at risk are children living in unstable family environments. It is estimated that as many as 59% of children being prostituted are or were formerly in the foster care system according to the Los Angeles County Probation Department. Although the numbers of specific cases are low, there have been instances in which parents have been responsible for the trafficking of their child. It is in these specific instances that extra protections for commercially sexually exploited children (CSEC) are needed. [This bill] will add commercial sexual exploitation of a child to the list of circumstances under which family reunification may be eschewed for the protection of the child. Such a change in law will offer local flexibility to juvenile courts in the decision of whether reunification services should be provided to a parent. It will also provide additional legal protections to foster youth who have been the victim of exploitation. Further, this bill will include new protections in state law that ensure all foster youth who have been sexually exploited are not at risk of further exploitation by their parent or guardian."
Analysis Prepared by: Kelsy Castillo / HUM. S. / (916) 319-2089 FN: 0003513
Click here to enter text.
Office of Senate Floor Analyses (916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) 327-4478 | AB |
CONSENT
Bill No: AB 1702
:
SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE: 7-0, 6/14/16
AYES: Jackson, Moorlach, Anderson, Hertzberg, Leno, Monning, Wieckowski
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 76-0, 5/2/16 - See last page for vote
County Welfare Directors Association of California
DIGEST: This bill provides that reunification services need not be provided when the court finds that the parent or guardian knowingly participated in, or permitted, the sexual exploitation of the child, except if the parent or guardian demonstrated by a preponderance of the evidence that he or she was coerced into permitting, or participating in, the sexual exploitation of the child.
Existing law:
- Provides that a minor may be removed from the physical custody of his or her parents and become a dependent of the juvenile court for serious abuse or neglect, or risk of serious abuse or neglect, as specified. (Welf. & Inst. Code Sec. 300.)
- Provides that unless certain exceptions apply, the primary objective of the juvenile dependency system is reunification of the minor with his or her family, and the court must order the social worker to provide services to reunify children legally removed from a parent. (Fam. Code Sec. 7950, Welf. & Inst. Code Secs. 202, 300.2, 361.5.)
- Allows the court to deny reunification services in 16 situations, as specified, including:
- the whereabouts of the parent are unknown;
- the parent is suffering from a mental disability, as specified;
- the child or sibling of the child has previously entered the dependency system due to physical or sexual abuse, returned to the parent, and is being removed from the home again because of physical or sexual abuse;
- the parent caused the death of another child;
- the child or sibling of the child has entered the dependency system as a result of severe sexual or physical abuse inflicted by the parent; and
- that the child was conceived by means of sexual intercourse with a child under the age of 14 years. (Welf. & Inst. Code Sec. 361.5(b).)
- Provides that a finding of severe sexual abuse may be based on, but is not limited to, sexual intercourse, or stimulation involving genital-genital, oral-genital, anal-genital, or oral-anal contact, whether between the parent or guardian and the child or a sibling or half sibling of the child, or between the child or a sibling or half sibling of the child and another person or animal with the actual or implied consent of the parent or guardian; or the penetration or manipulation of the child’s, sibling’s, or half sibling’s genital organs or rectum by any animate or inanimate object for the sexual gratification of the parent or guardian, or for the sexual gratification of another person with the actual or implied consent of the parent or guardian. (Welf. & Inst. Code Sec. 361.5(b).)
This bill adds to the list above by allowing the court to deny reunification services if the court finds that the parent or guardian knowingly participated in, or permitted the sexual exploitation of the child unless the parent or guardian, demonstrated by a preponderance evidence, that he or she was coerced into permitting, or participating in, the sexual exploitation of the child.
Background
Unless certain exceptions apply, the court must order a social worker to provide services to reunify the family if a child is legally removed from a parent and the parent has not voluntarily relinquished parental rights. The heart of reunification is Welf. & Inst. Code Sec. 361.5, which sets out the statutory framework for reunification services and defines who receives them. A good faith plan for reunifying the child with his or her parents is required by both statute and due process. The denial of services has a profound impact on the family, because to deny parents reunification services is really an order precluding the child’s return. Thus, it is difficult to exaggerate the importance of reunification to dependency proceedings. (In re Luke L. (1996) 44 Cal.App.4th 670, 678.)
That being said, there are 16 circumstances that the Legislature has deemed so egregious that the court need not order reunification services, including when a parent has caused the death of another child through abuse or neglect, the child (or a sibling of the child) has been adjudicated a dependent of the court due to severe sexual abuse or severe physical harm, or where a child under five years of age suffered severe physical abuse by a parent. (Welf. & Inst. Code Sec. 361.5(b).) This bill, seeking to protect children who have been sexually exploited at the hand of, or because of the consent of, a parent adds the act of sexual exploitation of a child to the list of 16 situations where the court need not order reunification services.
FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: Fiscal Com.: Local:
County of Alameda (co-source)
County Welfare Directors Association of California (co-source)
American Academy of Pediatrics
Butte County Department of Employment and Social Services
California Association of Marriage and Family Therapists
California Catholic Conference
California Coalition for Youth
California Immigrant Policy Center
California Police Chiefs Association
California Probation, Parole, and Correctional Association
California State Association of Counties
County of Madera
County of San Bernardino
LIUNA Locals 777 & 972
Los Angeles Deputy Probation Officers’ Union, AFSCME, Local 685
Los Angeles Professional Peace Officers Association
National Association of Social Workers
Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors
Urban Counties of California
Ventura County Board of Supervisors
OPPOSITION: (Verified 6/17/16)
Legal Services for Prisoners with Children
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: Alameda County Social Services Agency, sponsor, writes in support:
[C]ounties have identified a gap in dependency law related to family reunification efforts. Specifically, existing law requires counties to provide reunification services to a parent or guardian even when they have knowingly engaged in, or consented to, the sexual exploitation of their child. … AB 1702 creates a crucial protection for foster youth who have suffered from sexual exploitation at the hands of their parents or guardians.
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION: Legal Services for Prisoners with Children writes:
Courts already have a great deal of discretion in determining to withhold reunification services—more than enough to ensure that they are able to provide for children’s best interests. Adding to existing exemptions is not only redundant, it is dangerous in that it gives courts—which have been statistically proven to be more punitive with formerly incarcerated parents and with parents of color—more latitude to deny parents the ability to ever see their children again.
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 76-0, 5/2/16
AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Travis Allen, Arambula, Atkins, Baker, Bigelow, Bloom, Bonilla, Bonta, Brough, Brown, Burke, Calderon, Campos, Chang, Chau, Chávez, Chiu, Chu, Cooley, Cooper, Dababneh, Dahle, Daly, Dodd, Eggman, Frazier, Gallagher, Cristina Garcia, Eduardo Garcia, Gatto, Gipson, Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon, Gray, Grove, Hadley, Harper, Holden, Irwin, Jones, Jones-Sawyer, Kim, Lackey, Levine, Linder, Lopez, Low, Maienschein, Mathis, Mayes, McCarty, Medina, Melendez, Mullin, Nazarian, Obernolte, O'Donnell, Olsen, Patterson, Quirk, Rodriguez, Salas, Santiago, Steinorth, Mark Stone, Thurmond, Ting, Wagner, Waldron, Weber, Wilk, Wood, Rendon
NO VOTE RECORDED: Beth Gaines, Roger Hernández, Ridley-Thomas, Williams
6/17/16 15:03:54
Senator Hannah-Beth Jackson, Chair
2015-2016 Regular Session
Bill No: AB 1702 (Author:Mark Stone)
Version: March 16, 2016
Hearing Date: June 14, 2016
Fiscal: No
Urgency: No
Consultant: NR
SUBJECT
Juveniles: dependent children: reunification services
DESCRIPTION
This bill would provide that reunification services need not be provided when the court finds that the parent or guardian participated in, or consented to, the sexual exploitation of the child, as prescribed, except if the parent or guardian was coerced into consenting to, or participating in, the sexual exploitation of the child.
BACKGROUND
Unless certain exceptions apply, the court must order a social worker to provide services to reunify the family if a child is legally removed from a parent and the parent has not voluntarily relinquished parental rights. The heart of reunification is Welf. & Inst. Code Sec. 361.5, which sets out the statutory framework for reunification services and defines who receives them. A good faith plan for reunifying the child with his or her parents is required by both statute and due process. The denial of services has a profound impact on the family, because to deny parents reunification services is really an order precluding the child’s return. Thus, it is difficult to exaggerate the importance of reunification to dependency proceedings. (In re Luke L. (1996) 44 Cal.App.4th 670, 678.)
That being said, there are 16 circumstances that the Legislature has deemed so egregious that the court need not order reunification services, including when a parent has caused the death of another child through abuse or neglect, the child (or a sibling of the child) has been adjudicated a dependent of the court due to severe sexual abuse or severe physical harm, or where a child under five years of age suffered severe physical abuse by a parent. (Welf. & Inst. Code Sec. 361.5(b).) This bill, seeking to protect children who have been sexually exploited at the hand of, or because of the consent of, a parent would add sexual exploitation of a child to the list of 16 situations where the court need not order reunification services.
CHANGES TO EXISTING LAW
Existing law provides that a minor may be removed from the physical custody of his or her parents and become a dependent of the juvenile court for serious abuse or neglect, or risk of serious abuse or neglect, as specified. (Welf. & Inst. Code Sec. 300.)
Existing law provides that unless certain exceptions apply, the primary objective of the juvenile dependency system is reunification of the minor with his or her family, and the court must order the social worker to provide services to reunify children legally removed from a parent. (Fam. Code Sec. 7950, Welf. & Inst. Code Secs. 202, 300.2, 361.5.)
Existing law allows the court to deny reunification services in 16 situations, as specified, including:
- the whereabouts of the parent are unknown;
- the parent is suffering from a mental disability, as specified;
- the child or sibling of the child has previously entered the dependency system due to physical or sexual abuse, returned to the parent, and is being removed from the home again because of physical or sexual abuse;
- the parent caused the death of another child;
- the child or sibling of the child has entered the dependency system as a result of severe sexual or physical abuse inflicted by the parent; and
- that the child was conceived by means of sexual intercourse with a child under the age of 14 years. (Welf. & Inst. Code Sec. 361.5(b).)
Existing law provides that a finding of severe sexual abuse may be based on, but is not limited to, sexual intercourse, or stimulation involving genital-genital, oral-genital, anal-genital, or oral-anal contact, whether between the parent or guardian and the child or a sibling or half sibling of the child, or between the child or a sibling or half sibling of the child and another person or animal with the actual or implied consent of the parent or guardian; or the penetration or manipulation of the child’s, sibling’s, or half sibling’s genital organs or rectum by any animate or inanimate object for the sexual gratification of the parent or guardian, or for the sexual gratification of another person with the actual or implied consent of the parent or guardian. (Welf. & Inst. Code Sec. 361.5(b).)
This bill would add to the list above and allow the court to deny reunification services if the court finds that the parent or guardian participated in or consented to the sexual exploitation of the child, as defined, unless the parent or guardian was coerced into consenting to, or participating in, the sexual exploitation of the child.
COMMENT
- Stated need for the bill
According to the author:
This narrow, targeted law change will provide additional legal protections to foster youth who have been the victim of commercial sexual exploitation at the hands of their own parent or guardian. This bill will also provide new protections in state law that ensure foster youth who have been commercially sexually exploited by their parent or guardian are not placed at risk of further exploitation by the very system that is supposed to protect them.
- Consistent with existing policy protecting children from sexual abuse
Commercial sexual exploitation of children is a growing problem. Be it through print, film, live performance, or prostitution, an estimated 300,000 domestic children are exploited every year, and are most likely to be sexually exploited by their families or family friends for monetary gain. (Daley, Hagy, and Mukasey, Commercial Sexual Exploitation of Children: What Do We Know and What Do We Do About It?(2007) National Institute of Justice.)
In the United States, prostitution is a major lucrative enterprise in which pimps make millions of dollars in profits. The most profitable legal paradigm involves “pimps” - adults who use psychological methods to target minors because they are “easier to manipulate, work harder to earn money and are more marketable.” The minors may reach quotas of as much as $400 a day and then turn over all of the money to the adult. The majority of these child prostitution cases in the United States involve native, as opposed to foreign, youth. According to the United States Senate, 200,000 to 300,000 domestic minors are at risk of exploitation by America’s commercial sex industry. Moreover, the average age in which minors are trafficked for commercial sex is between twelve and fourteen years old. Children as young as five years old have been sold for sex, some even by their own parents. In attempts to escape sexual abuse in their homes, many kids run away from home only to be lured into the commercial sex industry. They become at risk for all forms of sex trafficking, including pornography, stripping, modeling, and prostitution. (Butler, Cheryl Nelson Kids For Sale: Does America Recognize Its Own Sexually Exploited Minors As Victims Of Human Trafficking? (2014) 44 Seton Hall L. Rev. 834.))
Under existing law there are 16 circumstances that the Legislature has deemed so egregious that the court need not order reunification services. (Welf. & Inst. Code Sec. 361.5(b).) These exceptions to reunification demonstrate how the dependency system’s primary goals of ensuring the safety of children and preservation of family are balanced. Thus, when a child has been severely physically or sexually abused by a parent, the court need not offer reunification services. Another situation where reunification services may not be ordered is where a child has entered the dependency system due to physical or sexual abuse (caused by the parent or another person because of the parent’s negligence), and was returned home after the provision of reunification services, only to be abused again.
Recognizing the ubiquity of commercial child sexual exploitation, this bill would additionally allow the court to deny reunification services when a parent or guardian participated in or consented to the sexual exploitation of the child, unless the parent or guardian was coerced into consenting to, or participating in, the sexual exploitation of the child. This bill would define “sexual exploitation” by referencing provisions in the Penal Code, which include conduct involving matter depicting a minor engaged in obscene acts, permitting or encouraging a child to engage in prostitution or any live performance involving obscene sexual conduct. This bill would also include in the definition of sexual exploitation a person who causes, induces, or persuades, or attempts to cause, induce or persuade a minor to engage in a commercial sex act. (See Penal Codes Secs. 236.1(c) and 11165.1(c).)
- Exempts a parent who was threatened or otherwise forced to consent to the exploitation of his or her child
This bill would not allow the court to deny reunification services “in which the parent or guardian was coerced into consenting to, or participating in, the sexual exploitation of the child.” By recognizing that a parent may have consented to the sexual exploitation of a child only because of coercion, defined as “compelling by force, intimidation, or authority, especially without regard for individual desire or volition,” this bill acknowledges that parents may be as exploited as the children they are obligated to protect. Yet the concept of “consent” has legal significance. Consent, generally requires that a person knowingly, and of their own volition, give permission for a specified act, and is therefore incompatible with actions taken as a result of threats, coercion, or duress. Thus, “consent” given as a result of coercion is arguably not “consent” at all. Accordingly, the author offers the following amendment replacing “consent” with “permitted,” which would appropriately give the court discretion to examine the circumstances surrounding instances of child sexual exploitation and determine when to deny, and when to order, reunification services.
Author’s amendments:
- Page 9, line 32, after “guardian” insert “knowingly”
- Page 9, line 32 strike “consented to,” and insert “permitted”
- Page 9, line 36, after “guardian,” insert “demonstrated by a preponderance of the evidence that he or she”
- Page 9, line 36 strike “consenting to” and insert “permitting”
These amendments should help ensure that victim-parents can get the services they need to protect themselves and their children from further abuse. In the event that a parent who was forced into permitting the sexual exploitation of his or her child is offered reunification services, staff notes that protections in existing law help ensure the protection of the child, as discussed below.
- A child need not be placed in a parent’s custody during reunification services
A good faith plan for reunifying the child with his or her parents is required by statute and by due process. In addition, the approach taken to reunify the child with his or her family should not be mechanical; instead, a reunification plan “must be appropriate for each family and be based on the unique facts relating to that family.” (In re Dino E. (1992) 6 Cal.4th 1768, 1777.) An appropriate plan will contain time frames and time limits that suit the circumstances. For example, not every parent needs a full-time drug program, or 52 weeks of domestic violence classes, or a parenting class. Visitation, however, is a vital component of reunification, and must typically be provided if the child is placed in foster care after the dispositional hearing and the court provides the parent with reunification services. (In re Alvin R. Jr. (2003) 108 Cal.4th 962, 972.)
Accordingly, the fact that reunification services are ordered does not necessarily mean that the child will ever be returned to the custody of the offending parent. The court has routinely emphasized that compliance with reunification services and the case plan is a different issue than the child’s best interest, which is always the court’s primary focus and what it looks to when determining whether to return a child to the parent’s custody. (See In re Jacob P. (2007) 157 Cal. 4th 819; Constance K. v. Superior Court (1998) 61 Cal. 4th 689, 704; and Blanca P. v. Superior Court (1996) 45 Cal. 4th 1738, 1748.)
- Any party, or the court, may seek termination of reunification services
In general, the court is only obligated to order six months of reunification services. If the child is not returned to the parents by that six-month date, and the court cannot make the significant findings required to continue reunification (e.g., the parent is not availing herself to the court-ordered services, criminal history subsequent to the child’s removal, efforts and/or progress of parent to create a stable home for the child), the court can terminate reunification services at six months and refer the matter for a permanent plan implementation hearing. (Welf. & Inst. Code Sec. 361.5(a).)
Furthermore, any party, including a child who is a dependent of the juvenile court, may petition the court to terminate reunification services if it appears that a change of circumstance or new evidence exists that justifies termination of reunification services, or an action of the parent creates a substantial likelihood that reunification will not occur. (Welf. & Inst. Code Sec. 388(c).) Accordingly, if reunification services are not improving the chances that the parent will be able to create a safe home for the child, the court or any party (i.e., the child, the parent, or the county) may seek to terminate reunification services and start the process of finding the child a new, safe home.
Support: American Academy of Pediatrics; Butte County Department of Employment and Social Services; California Association of Marriage and Family Therapists; California Catholic Conference; California Coalition for Youth; California Immigrant Policy Center; California Police Chiefs Association; California Probation, Parole, and Correctional Association; California State Association of Counties; County of Madera; County of San Bernardino; Los Angeles Deputy Probation Officers’ Union, AFSCME, Local 685; Los Angeles Professional Peace Officers Association; National Association of Social Workers; Urban Counties of California; Ventura County Board of Supervisors;
Opposition: None Known
HISTORY
Source: County of Alameda; County Welfare Directors Association of California
Related Pending Legislation: None Known
Prior Legislation: None Known
Prior Vote:
Assembly Floor (Ayes 76, Noes 0)
Assembly Human Services Committee (Ayes 6, Noes 0)
Assembly Judiciary Committee (Ayes 8, Noes 0)
**************
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
ATR Bill Id:AB 1702
Author:(Mark Stone and Maienschein)
As Amended Ver:March 16, 2016
Majority vote
Committee | Votes | Ayes | Noes |
Judiciary | 8-0 | Mark Stone, Wagner, Alejo, Chau, Cristina Garcia, Holden, Maienschein, Ting | |
Human Services | 6-0 | Bonilla, Grove, Lopez, Maienschein, Mark Stone, Thurmond |
SUMMARY: Expands the court's ability to deny reunification services to the parent or guardian of a dependent child to include instances in which the court finds, by clear and convincing evidence, that the parent has participated in or consented to the child's sexual exploitation, as specified.
EXISTING LAW:
- Establishes that the purpose of the dependency system is the maximum safety and protection of children who are currently being abused, neglected, or exploited. Provides that the focus is on the preservation of the family, as well as the safety, protection, and physical and emotional well-being of the child. (Welfare and Institutions Code (WIC) Section 300.2)
- States the intent of the Legislature to preserve and strengthen a child's family ties whenever possible and to reunify a foster youth with his or her biological family whenever possible, or to provide a permanent placement alternative, such as adoption or guardianship. (WIC Section 16000)
- Requires the court, if at the initial hearing the juvenile court orders a child be removed from his or her parent or guardian due to abuse or neglect, to order that child welfare reunification services be provided to the family as soon as possible in order to reunify the child with his or her family, if appropriate. (WIC Section 319(e))
- Requires the court, at a dispositional hearing, to order a social worker to provide child welfare services to a child who has been removed from his or her parents' or guardians' custody and to the parents or guardians in order to support the goal of reunification, for a specified time period, except under certain circumstances. Provides that children and families in the child welfare system should typically receive a full six months of reunification services if the child is under three years of age, and twelve months if the child is over three years of age, but that may be extended up to 18 or 24 months, as provided. (WIC Section 361.5(a))
- Provides that reunification services need not be provided if the court finds, by clear and convincing evidence, that specified conditions exist, including:
- The parent or guardian is suffering from a mental disability that renders the parent incapable of using the reunification services;
- The parent or guardian has caused the death of another child through abuse or neglect;
- The child or a sibling has been adjudicated a dependent as the result of severe physical or sexual abuse;
- The parent or guardian has been convicted of a violent felony; and
- The parent or guardian has a history of drug or alcohol abuse and has failed to comply with treatment programs as provided. (WIC 361.5(b))
- Prevents the court from ordering reunification services for a parent or guardian in specified situations, unless the court finds that reunification is in the child's best interest. (WIC Section 361.5(c))
- Allows any party to petition the court to terminate reunification services early, and allows the court to terminate those services after finding, by clear and convincing evidence, that:
- Circumstances now exist that, had they previously existed, would have led the court to bypass or not order reunification services; or,
- The action or inaction of the parent or guardian creates a substantial likelihood that reunification will not occur, including but not limited to the parent's or guardian's failure to visit the child, or the failure to participate regularly and make substantive progress in a court-ordered treatment plan. (WIC Section 388(c))
- Defines "sexual exploitation” and "commercial sexual exploitation" of a child. (PEN 11165.1 (c) and (d))
FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown. This bill is keyed non-fiscal by the Legislative Counsel.
COMMENTS:
Child Welfare Services: The purpose of California's Child Welfare Services (CWS) system is to protect children from abuse and neglect and provide for their health and safety. When children are identified as being at risk of abuse, neglect or abandonment, county juvenile courts hold legal dependency jurisdiction; these children are served by the CWS system through the appointment of a social worker. Through this juvenile dependency system, there are multiple opportunities for the custody of the child, or his or her placement outside of the home, to be evaluated, reviewed and determined by the judicial system, in consultation with the child’s social worker, to help provide the best possible services to the child. The CWS system seeks to help children who have been removed from their homes reunify with their parents or guardians, whenever appropriate. However, the court may determine that an alternate permanent placement is more fitting; the court must give preference to potential placements in this order: relatives, nonrelative extended family members, or family foster homes. Placement in group homes or other intensive treatment placement settings are considered only in more challenging situations where a child may need stabilization services in order to transition to a less restrictive placement, such as with a relative or foster caregiver. There are currently close to 63,000 children and youth in California's CWS system.
Family reunification services: Because the intent of the dependency system is to, whenever possible, reunify children with their families, parents are often provided reunification services in order to safely reunify with their children in foster care. Reunification services often include efforts to address the circumstances under which a child was removed from their parent's custody, including drug and alcohol treatment, anger management counseling, or parenting classes. Currently reunification services may be denied to parents or guardians in order to protect the child from further harm, including a parent who: is a registered sex offender, has willfully abducted the child or a sibling, or has been convicted of a violent felony, among others.
Commercial Sexual Exploitation of Children (CSEC): Commercial sexual exploitation of children is defined as the sexual exploitation of children entirely, or at least primarily, for financial or other economic reasons. Under this definition, the economic exchanges may be either monetary or non-monetary (i.e., for food, shelter, drugs). Sex trafficking of minors is defined as the "recruitment, harboring, transportation, provision, or obtaining of a person for the purpose of a commercial sex act" where the person is a United States citizen or lawful permanent resident under the age of 18 years.
According to DSS, approximately 800,000 victims annually are trafficked across international borders worldwide, and between 14,500-17,500 of those victims are trafficked into the United States. Nearly 95% of CSEC victims in the U.S. are female, and it is estimated that between 50-80% of child victims of commercial sexual exploitation have been involved with the child welfare system, according to the National Center for Youth Law. According to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, it is estimated that one in six endangered runaways were likely sex trafficking victims in 2014. Many experts believe, however, that these statistics are underestimated; challenges arise when identifying victims, collecting and cross-referencing data, and deciding on common definitions in order to collect accurate statistics. Many youth also do not identify as victims or may be reluctant to admit to victimization due to fears of retaliation from traffickers, deportation, or incarceration by law enforcement.
Need for this bill: According to the author's office, "The sex trafficking of children is a serious problem in California; three metropolitan areas (San Francisco, Los Angeles, and San Diego) have been rated as 'high intensity child prostitution' areas by the FBI [Federal Bureau of Investigation]. Particularly at risk are children living in unstable family environments. It is estimated that as many as 59% of children being prostituted are or were formerly in the foster care system according to the Los Angeles County Probation Department. Although the numbers of specific cases are low, there have been instances in which parents have been responsible for the trafficking of their child. It is in these specific instances that extra protections for commercially sexually exploited children (CSEC) are needed. [This bill] will add commercial sexual exploitation of a child to the list of circumstances under which family reunification may be eschewed for the protection of the child. Such a change in law will offer local flexibility to juvenile courts in the decision of whether reunification services should be provided to a parent. It will also provide additional legal protections to foster youth who have been the victim of exploitation. Further, this bill will include new protections in state law that ensure all foster youth who have been sexually exploited are not at risk of further exploitation by their parent or guardian."
Analysis Prepared by: Kelsy Castillo / HUM. S. / (916) 319-2089 FN: 0002797
Date of Hearing: April 26, 2016
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON HUMAN SERVICES
Susan Bonilla, Chair
ABPCA Bill Id:AB 1702 (
Author:Mark Stone) – As Amended Ver:March 16, 2016
SUBJECT: Juveniles: dependent children: reunification services
SUMMARY: Expands the court’s ability to deny reunification services to the parent or guardian of a dependent child to include instances in which the court finds, by clear and convincing evidence, that the parent has participated in or consented to the child’s sexual exploitation, as specified.
EXISTING LAW:
- Establishes that the purpose of the dependency system is the maximum safety and protection of children who are currently being abused, neglected, or exploited. Provides that the focus is on the preservation of the family, as well as the safety, protection, and physical and emotional well-being of the child. (WIC 300.2)
- States the intent of the Legislature to preserve and strengthen a child’s family ties whenever possible and to reunify a foster youth with his or her biological family whenever possible, or to provide a permanent placement alternative, such as adoption or guardianship. (WIC 16000)
- Requires the court, if at the initial hearing the juvenile court orders a child be removed from his or her parent or guardian due to abuse or neglect, to order that child welfare reunification services be provided to the family as soon as possible in order to reunify the child with his or her family, if appropriate. (WIC 319 (e))
- Requires the court, at a dispositional hearing, to order a social worker to provide child welfare services to a child who has been removed from his or her parents’ or guardians’ custody and to the parents or guardians in order to support the goal of reunification, for a specified time period, except under certain circumstances. Provides that children and families in the child welfare system should typically receive a full six months of reunification services if the child is under three years of age, and twelve months if the child is over three years of age, but that may be extended up to 18 or 24 months, as provided. (WIC 361.5 (a))
- Provides that reunification services need not be provided if the court finds, by clear and convincing evidence, that specified conditions exist, including:
- The parent or guardian is suffering from a mental disability that renders the parent incapable of using the reunification services;
- The parent or guardian has caused the death of another child through abuse or neglect;
- The child or a sibling has been adjudicated a dependent as the result of severe physical or sexual abuse;
- The parent or guardian has been convicted of a violent felony; and
- The parent or guardian has a history of drug or alcohol abuse and has failed to comply with treatment programs as provided. (WIC 361.5 (b))
- Prevents the court from ordering reunification services for a parent or guardian in specified situations, unless the court finds that reunification is in the child’s best interest. (WIC 361.5 (c))
- Allows any party to petition the court to terminate reunification services early, and allows the court to terminate those services after finding, by clear and convincing evidence, that:
- Circumstances now exist that, had they previously existed, would have led the court to bypass or not order reunification services; or,
- The action or inaction of the parent or guardian creates a substantial likelihood that reunification will not occur, including but not limited to the parent’s or guardian’s failure to visit the child, or the failure to participate regularly and make substantive progress in a court-ordered treatment plan. (WIC 388 (c))
- Defines "sexual exploitation” and "commercial sexual exploitation" of a child. (PEN 11165.1 (c) and (d))
FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown.
COMMENTS:
Child Welfare Services: The purpose of California’s Child Welfare Services (CWS) system is to protect children from abuse and neglect and provide for their health and safety. When children are identified as being at risk of abuse, neglect or abandonment, county juvenile courts hold legal dependency jurisdiction; these children are served by the CWS system through the appointment of a social worker. Through this juvenile dependency system, there are multiple opportunities for the custody of the child, or his or her placement outside of the home, to be evaluated, reviewed and determined by the judicial system, in consultation with the child’s social worker, to help provide the best possible services to the child. The CWS system seeks to help children who have been removed from their homes reunify with their parents or guardians, whenever appropriate. However, the court may determine that an alternate permanent placement is more fitting; the court must give preference to potential placements in this order: relatives, nonrelative extended family members, or family foster homes. Placement in group homes or other intensive treatment placement settings are considered only in more challenging situations where a child may need stabilization services in order to transition to a less restrictive placement, such as with a relative or foster caregiver. There are currently close to 63,000 children and youth in California’s CWS system.
Family reunification services: Because the intent of the dependency system is to, whenever possible, reunify children with their families, parents are often provided reunification services in order to safely reunify with their children in foster care. Reunification services often include efforts to address the circumstances under which a child was removed from their parent’s custody, including drug and alcohol treatment, anger management counseling, or parenting classes. Currently reunification services may be denied to parents or guardians in order to protect the child from further harm, including a parent who: is a registered sex offender, has willfully abducted the child or a sibling, or has been convicted of a violent felony, among others.
Commercial Sexual Exploitation of Children (CSEC): Commercial sexual exploitation of children is defined as the sexual exploitation of children entirely, or at least primarily, for financial or other economic reasons. Under this definition, the economic exchanges may be either monetary or non-monetary (i.e., for food, shelter, drugs). Sex trafficking of minors is defined as the “recruitment, harboring, transportation, provision, or obtaining of a person for the purpose of a commercial sex act” where the person is a United States citizen or lawful permanent resident under the age of 18 years.
According to DSS, approximately 800,000 victims annually are trafficked across international borders worldwide, and between 14,500-17,500 of those victims are trafficked into the United States. Nearly 95% of CSEC victims in the U.S. are female, and it is estimated that between 50-80% of child victims of commercial sexual exploitation have been involved with the child welfare system, according to the National Center for Youth Law. According to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, it is estimated that one in six endangered runaways were likely sex trafficking victims in 2014. Many experts believe, however, that these statistics are underestimated; challenges arise when identifying victims, collecting and cross-referencing data, and deciding on common definitions in order to collect accurate statistics. Many youth also do not identify as victims or may be reluctant to admit to victimization due to fears of retaliation from traffickers, deportation, or incarceration by law enforcement.
Need for this bill: According to the author’s office, “The sex trafficking of children is a serious problem in California; three metropolitan areas (San Francisco, Los Angeles, and San Diego) have been rated as ‘high intensity child prostitution’ areas by the FBI. Particularly at risk are children living in unstable family environments. It is estimated that as many as 59% of children being prostituted are or were formerly in the foster care system according to the Los Angeles County Probation Department. Although the numbers of specific cases are low, there have been instances in which parents have been responsible for the trafficking of their child. It is in these specific instances that extra protections for commercially sexually exploited children (CSEC) are needed. [This bill] will add commercial sexual exploitation of a child to the list of circumstances under which family reunification may be eschewed for the protection of the child. Such a change in law will offer local flexibility to juvenile courts in the decision of whether reunification services should be provided to a parent. It will also provide additional legal protections to foster youth who have been the victim of exploitation. Further, this bill will include new protections in state law that ensure all foster youth who have been sexually exploited are not at risk of further exploitation by their parent or guardian.”
PRIOR LEGISLATION:
SB 855 (Committee on Budget and Fiscal Review), Chapter 29, Statutes of 2014, provided structure and incentives to encourage county agencies to collaborate in identifying and serving CSEC.
SECOND COMMITTEE OF REFERENCE. This bill was previously heard in the Assembly Judiciary Committee on March 15, 2016 and was approved on an 8-0 vote.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:
Support
Alameda County – co sponsor
Alameda County Social Services Agency – co-sponsor
American Academy of Pediatrics
Butte County Department of Emergency and Social Services
California Coalition for Youth (CCY)
California Immigrant Policy Center
California Police Chiefs Association
California Probation, Parole and Correctional Association (CPPCA)
California State Association of Counties
Catholic Conference
County of Madera Department of Social Services
County Welfare Directors Association of California (CWDA) –co-sponsor
LIUNA Locals 777 & 792
Los Angeles Professional Peace Officers Association
Madera County Board of Supervisors
National Association of Social Workers
Urban Counties of California
Ventura County Board of Supervisors
Opposition
Legal Services for Prisoners With Children
Analysis Prepared by: Kelsy Castillo / HUM. S. / (916) 319-2089
Date of Hearing: March 15, 2016
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY
Mark Stone, Chair
ABPCA Bill Id:AB 1702
Author:(Mark Stone and Maienschein) – As Amended Ver:March 7, 2016
PROPOSED CONSENT (As Proposed to be Amended)
SUBJECT: REUNIFICATION SERVICES FOR DEPENDENT CHILDREN: SEXUAL EXPLOITATION
KEY ISSUE: in order to protect abused children from further trauma, SHOULD A COURT BE PERMITTED TO DENY REUNIFICATION SERVICES TO THE PARENt OF A FOSTER child WHO ALLOWED that CHILD TO BE SEXUALLY exploited?
SYNOPSIS
California’s child welfare system is responsible for the protection and safety of children at risk of abuse, neglect or abandonment. When it is necessary for the state to remove a child from his or her parents, the primary objective is to safely reunify the child with his or her family, usually accomplished by offering various reunification services to the parents. However not all children can be safely reunited with their families and the Welfare & Institutions Code allows judges to forgo reunification services when the court finds, by clear and convincing evidence, that certain situations exist, such as when a parent has been convicted of a violent felony or has previously caused the death of another child.
This bill, sponsored by the County Welfare Directors of California and the County of Alameda, establishes an additional circumstance in which reunification services can be denied to a parent -- when that parent has consented to, or participated in, the sexual exploitation of the child. The author explains that the bill is necessary to "ensure foster youth who have been commercially sexually exploited by their parent or guardian are not placed at risk of further exploitation by the very system that is supposed to protect them." The bill correctly recognizes that parents may be as exploited as the children they are trying to protect and rightly exempts from the exception from reunification services parents who were coerced into consenting to the sexual exploitation of the child. This will help ensure that victim-parents can themselves get the services they need to protect themselves and their children from further abuse. Like other exceptions from reunification services, this bill will still allow a court to provide reunification services to parents who have allowed their children to be sexually exploited, but only if the judge finds, by clear and convincing evidence, that reunification is in the child's best interest. This bill is supported by, among others, the California Immigrant Policy Center, the California Police Chiefs Association and the Los Angeles Professional Peace Officers Association. It has no opposition.
SUMMARY: Permits a court to deny reunification services to the parent of a dependent child who participated in or consented to the child's sexual exploitation, except as provided. Specifically, this bill:
- Permits a court to deny reunification services to a parent or guardian if the court finds, by clear and convincing evidence, that the parent or guardian had participated in, or consented to, the sexual exploitation of the child, as defined. However, provides that this exemption from reunification services does not apply if the parent or guardian was coerced into consenting to, or participating in, the sexual exploitation of the child.
- Provides that the court, at the hearing to determine whether to order reunification services, may not order reunification for a parent or guardian described in #1), above, unless the court finds, by clear and convincing evidence, that reunification is in the child's best interest.
EXISTING LAW:
- Establishes that the purpose of the dependency system is the maximum safety and protection for children who are currently being abused, neglected, or exploited. Provides that the focus is on the preservation of the family, as well as the safety, protection, and physical and emotional well-being of the child. (Welfare & Institutions Code Section 300.2. Unless stated otherwise, all further statutory references are to that code.)
- If at the initial hearing the juvenile court orders a child removed from his or her parent due to abuse or neglect, requires the court to order that child welfare reunification services be provided to the family as soon as possible in order to reunify the child with his or her family, if appropriate. (Section 319 (e).)
- Requires the court, at a dispositional hearing, to order a social worker to provide child welfare services to a child who has been removed from his or her parents' custody and to the parents in order to support the goal of reunification, for a specified time period, except under certain circumstances. Provides that children and families in the child welfare system should typically receive a full six months of reunification services if the child is under three years of age, and twelve months if the child is over three years of age, but that may be extended up to 18 or 24 months, as provided. (Section 361.5 (a).)
- Provides that reunification services under #3, above, need not be provided if the court finds, by clear and convincing evidence, that specified conditions exist, including:
- The parent is suffering from a mental disability that renders the parent incapable of using the reunification services;
- The parent has caused the death of another child through abuse or neglect;
- The child or a sibling has been adjudicated a dependent as the result of several physical or sexual abuse;
- The parent has been convicted of a violent felony; or
- The parent has a history of drug or alcohol abuse and has failed to comply with treatment programs as provided. (Section 361.5 (b).)
- Prevents a court from ordering reunification services for a parent in specified situations, including the situations set forth in #4), (b)-(e), above, unless the court finds, by clear and convincing evidence, that reunification is in the child's best interest. (Section 361.5 (c).)
- Allows any party to petition the court to terminate reunification services early, and allows the court to terminate those services after finding, by clear and convincing evidence, that:
- Circumstances now exist that, had they previously existed would have led the court to bypass or not order reunification services; or,
- The action or inaction of the parent creates a substantial likelihood that reunification will not occur, including but not limited to the parent's or guardian’s failure to visit the child, or the failure to participate regularly and make substantive progress in a court-ordered treatment plan. (Section 388 (c).)
- Defines "sexual exploitation” and "commercial sexual exploitation" of a child. (Penal Code Section 11165.1 (c), (d).)
FISCAL EFFECT: As currently in print this bill is keyed non-fiscal.
COMMENTS: California’s child welfare system is responsible for ensuring the protection and safety of children at risk of abuse, neglect or abandonment. When it is necessary for the state to remove a child from his or her parents, the primary objective of the child welfare system is to safely reunify the child with his or her family. To support that objective, in most cases the juvenile court orders reunification services, such as counseling or treatment, for the child and the child’s parents. If the child is under the age of three, these reunification services are offered for a period of six months. If the child is over the age of three, the services are offered for twelve months. In some circumstances, the time period for reunification services can be extended up to 24 months.
However not all children can safely be reunited with their families and the Welfare & Institutions Code allows judges to forgo reunification services when the court finds, by clear and convincing evidence, that one of 16 specific situations exist. These situations include a parent who caused the death of another child through abuse or neglect or a parent with a history of drug or alcohol abuse who has failed to comply with required treatment programs. This bill creates a 17th circumstance in which a court can deny reunification services to a parent -- when the parent has consented to, or participated in, the sexual exploitation of the child. The author explains the need for the new exception from reunifications services:
This narrow, targeted law change will provide additional legal protections to foster youth who have been the victim of commercial sexual exploitation at the hands of their own parent or guardian. This bill will also provide new protections in state law that ensure foster youth who have been commercially sexually exploited by their parent or guardian are not placed at risk of further exploitation by the very system that is supposed to protect them.
Parents generally offered reunification services, but exemptions exist in order to protect foster children from further abuse. Since the goal of the dependency system is, whenever possible, to reunite children with their families, parents are generally provided services in order to safely reunify with their children in foster care. These services are designed to address the circumstances that caused the child to be removed from the parents in the first place, such as drug or alcohol treatment, anger management counseling or parenting classes, so that the child can be safely returned to his or her home. However, there are currently 16 instances when a parent or guardian can be denied reunification services, generally because the parent's or guardian's behavior is such that denial of services is necessary in order to protect children from further harm. In particular, if the juvenile court finds, by clear and convincing evidence, that one of the following specified instances exists reunification services can be denied:
- The parent cannot be located;
- The parent is suffering from a mental disability that renders the parent incapable of using the reunification services;
- The child or a sibling had previously been adjudicated a dependent as the result of physical or sexual abuse and the child is now being removed due to additional physical or sexual abuse;
- The parent caused the death of another child through abuse or neglect;
- The child was made a dependent under the age of five as the result of severe abuse inflicted by the parent or a person known to the parent, as provided;
- The child or a sibling has been adjudicated a dependent as the result of severe physical or sexual abuse;
- The parent is not receiving reunification services for a sibling of the child because of #'s 3, 5 or 6, above;
- The child was conceived as the result of rape or incest with a minor and the parent seeking services committed the rape or incest;
- The parent willfully abandoned the child;
- The court previously terminated reunification services, and the parent has not made subsequent efforts to address the parent's underlying problems;
- The parent's parental rights for another child have been terminated, and the parent has not made subsequent efforts to treat the problems that led to the termination;
- The parent has been convicted of a violent felony;
- The parent has a history of drug or alcohol abuse and has failed to comply with treatment programs as provided;
- The parent has told the court that she or he is not interested in receiving services;
- The parent willfully abducted the child or a sibling; or
- The parent is a registered sex offender. (Section 361.5 (b).)
However, even in these cases, a court may still choose to grant reunification services to the parent if the court determines that it is appropriate. In most cases, though, the court may only do so if it finds, again by clear and convincing evidence, that reunification is in the child's best interest. (Section 361.5 (c).) Foregoing reunification services generally speeds up the timeframe for finding an alternative permanency plan for the child, whether adoption or tribal customary adoption, guardianship, or even long-term foster care.
Process exists to petition the court to change, modify or set aside a court order, including an order for reunification services. A juvenile court can change reunification services after holding a hearing based on a petition to change, modify or set aside an existing order in light of a change of circumstance or new evidence. (Section 388.) In particular, courts can terminate reunifications services early if the actions or inactions of the parent or guardian make reunification impossible. This helps ensure a reasonable balance between trying to reunify the parent and child -- and giving the parent every opportunity to do so -- and not letting the child languish in foster care for any more time than is absolutely necessary. For example, if a parent has, after 10 months of reunification services, shown absolutely no willingness to comply with the terms of the reunification plan, the court may, upon a motion under Section 388, terminate services.
Unfortunate existence of commercial sexual exploitation of children in the foster care system. The child welfare system's strong preference for reunification exists against the backdrop that all too frequently, across America and throughout California, children are being sexually exploited for commercial gain:
Every day of the year, thousands of America’s children are coerced into performing sex for hire. Some of these children are brutally beaten and raped into submission. Others are literally stolen off the streets, then isolated, drugged, and starved until they become “willing” participants. Some children are alternately wooed and punished, eventually forming trauma bonds with their exploiters, similar to cases of domestic or intimate partner violence. Still others are living on the streets with no way to survive, except by exchanging sex for food, clothing and shelter. The people who sexually exploit children have built increasingly sophisticated criminal enterprises around the sale of vulnerable young boys and girls. This is a multi-billion dollar commercial industry that preys on children as young as ten, and it is happening to tens of thousands of American children in or near our own neighborhoods. (California Child Welfare Council, Ending the Commercial Sexual Exploitation of Children: A Call for Multi-System Collaboration in California 5.)
And the risks of sexual exploitation are only magnified for children in the foster care system who studies have shown are more vulnerable to this horrific abuse, despite being under the care and oversight of the child welfare agency and the juvenile court:
Youth in the child welfare system are particularly vulnerable to CSE [commercial sexual exploitation]. Abuse and neglect, unstable placements, and lack of positive relationships create vulnerabilities that exploiters target. “One recovered youth told me that, ‘being in foster care was the perfect training for commercial sexual exploitation. I was used to being moved without warning, without any say, not knowing where I was going or whether I was allowed to pack my clothes. After years in foster care, I didn’t think anyone would want to take care of me unless they were paid. So, when my pimp expected me to make money to support ‘the family’, it made sense to me.’" . . .
The children who fall prey to exploiters frequently have prior involvement with the child welfare system, including contact through child protective service investigations or placement in foster care. A study of Los Angeles County’s Succeeding Through Achievement and Resilience (STAR) Court, a specialty juvenile court working with exploited youth, revealed a strong link between CSE and the local child welfare agency. Among the seventy-two girls involved with the court, fifty-six have had prior contact with the Department of Children and Family Services. Within this group, forty-two were or are formally supervised by the dependency court, four had voluntary family maintenance, and five had several unsubstantiated child abuse referrals. In Oakland, two organizations that serve CSEC [commercially sexual exploited children] in Oakland found that of the 200 youth they served, fifty-three percent reported having lived in a foster care group home. Outside of California, other jurisdictions are recognizing similar associations—one study found that at least eighty-five percent of all CSEC in New York had a child welfare background, and seventy-five percent of those residing in New York City had spent time in the foster care system. These figures reflect the vulnerabilities of children within the child welfare system: neglected and abused youth are leading targets for exploiters and pimps. (Id.at 5-11 (footnotes omitted).)
This bill helps reduce risk of further abuse to foster youth who have been sexual exploited by allowing a court to deny reunification services to parents who have sexually exploited their children. To help combat the devastation caused by the sexual exploitation of children in the child welfare system and help these children avoid further abuse and begin to heal, this bill creates a new permissible exception to the requirement that each dependent child's parents or guardian be offered reunification services: when parents are involved in the sexual exploitation of their children. Under this exception, parents can be denied services if the court finds, by clear and convincing evidence at a dispositional hearing, that the parent (or guardian) participated in, or consented to, the sexual exploitation of the child, as defined under the Penal Code.
However, in order to ensure that parents who themselves are victims of abuse can be helped, this bill rightly exempts from this exception parents who were coerced into consenting to, or participating in, the sexual exploitation of the child. This recognizes the reality that commercial sexual exploitation can be inter-generational and that parents can be victims of sexual exploitation, along with their children. This should help ensure that victim-parents can get the services they need to protect both themselves and their children from further abuse.
Like other exceptions from reunification services, the exception added by this bill will still allow a judge to provide reunification services to parents who have participated in, or consented to, the sexual exploitation of their children, but only if the judge finds, again by clear and convincing evidence, that reunification is in the child's best interest. This will help ensure that courts have needed flexibility to order reunification services when such an order is truly the right thing to do for a particular child and a particular family.
Technical amendments clarify the definition of sexual exploitation. In order to properly define sexual exploitation, the author rightly proposes that the bill be amended to include in the definition of sexual exploitation under this bill, both "sexual exploitation" and "commercial sexual exploitation" of a child as defined in the Penal Code. The following amendment accomplishes that change:
On page 9, line 33, after "(c)", insert: or (d)
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:
Support
County of Alameda (co-sponsor)
County Welfare Directors Association of California (co-sponsor)
California Immigrant Policy Center
California Police Chiefs Association
Los Angeles Professional Peace Officers Association
Urban Counties of California
Opposition
None on file
Analysis Prepared by: Leora Gershenzon / JUD. / (916) 319-2334
Discussed in Hearing
59SEC
Assembly Floor
1MIN
Assembly Floor
5MIN
Assembly Standing Committee on Human Services
Bill Co-Author(s):