Existing law entitles a minor who is the subject of a juvenile court hearing to be present at that hearing. Under existing law, the court is required to allow the minor, if he or she so desires, to address the court and participate in the hearing.

This bill would require the court to inform the minor, if the minor is present at the hearing, of his or her right to address the court and participate in the hearing.

Existing law entitles a minor who is the subject of a juvenile court hearing to be present at that hearing. Under existing law, the court is required to allow the minor, if he or she so desires, to address the court and participate in the hearing.

This bill would require the court to inform the minor, if the minor is present at the hearing, of his or her right to address the court and participate in the hearing.

Existing law entitles a minor who is the subject of a juvenile court hearing to be present at that hearing. Under existing law, the court is required to allow the minor, if he or she so desires, to address the court and participate in the hearing.

This bill would require the court to inform the minor, if the minor is present at the hearing, of his or her right to address the court and participate in the hearing.

 CONSENT  

Bill No: AB 217

Author: Maienschein (R)

Introduced: 2/2/15

Vote: 21

SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE: 7-0, 6/9/15

AYES: Jackson, Moorlach, Anderson, Hertzberg, Leno, Monning, Wieckowski

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 78-0, 3/23/15 (Consent) - See last page for vote

SUBJECT: Juvenile law: hearings

SOURCE: Children’s Advocacy Institute – University of San Diego School of Law

DIGEST: This bill requires the court to inform a minor, if the minor is present at the juvenile hearing, of his or her right to address the court and participate in the hearing.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Requires that a child 10 years of age and older receive notice of his or her dependency hearings, including the initial petition hearing, jurisdictional hearings, and review hearings. (Welf. & Inst. Code Secs. 290.1-295.)

2. Allows a minor who is the subject of a dependency hearing, and who is entitled to notice of the hearing, to be present at the hearing. (Welf. & Inst. Code Sec. 349.)

3. Provides that a minor present at a hearing has the right to address the court, to participate in the hearing, and to be represented by counsel of his or her choice. (Welf. & Inst. Code Sec. 349.)

4. Requires the court to determine if a minor, who is 10 years of age or older and not present at a hearing, was properly notified of his or her right to attend the hearing, and allows a court to continue the hearing if the minor was not properly notified or wished to be present at the hearing, unless the court determines that it is not in the best interest of the child to do so. (Welf. & Inst. Code Sec. 349.)

This bill additionally requires the court to inform a minor at a hearing that he or she has the right to address the court and participate in the hearing.

Background

The importance of allowing a dependent child to participate in court hearings has been recognized in California since 2003, when the Legislature enacted AB 408 (Steinberg, Chapter 813, Statutes of 2003) which afforded a minor the right to address the court and otherwise participate in a dependency hearing. In 2006, Congress also recognized the importance of input from children in court proceedings in the Child and Family Services Improvement Act which required “procedural safeguards to be put in place to assure that in any permanency hearing with respect to a child, the court consults, in an age-appropriate manner, the child regarding the proposed permanency or transition plan. (42 U.S.C. Sec. 675(5)(C).)

This bill additionally requires the court to inform a child during a dependency proceeding that he or she has a right to address the court and participate in the hearing.

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: No Local: No

SUPPORT: (Verified 6/11/15)

Children’s Advocacy Institute – University of San Diego School of Law (source)

Advokids

Children Now

County Welfare Directors Association of California

Crittenton Services for Children and Families

Executive Committee of the Family Law Section of the State Bar

Juvenile Court Judges of California

Laborers’ International Union of North America locals 777 & 792

OPPOSITION: (Verified 6/11/15)

None received

ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: According to the author:

Juvenile Dependency hearings are critical to determining the path of a child’s future. Existing law as defined by Section 349 of the Welfare and Institutions Code already provides children with the right to talk during these hearings. Oftentimes the child’s input would be critical and swing a decision in one way or another, but the child is fearful to speak up because they have understandably not been exposed to legal proceedings, or understand their right to speak up.

This bill simply adds one sentence to Section 349 requiring the court to inform a minor of his or her pre-existing right to address the court if so desired. This fix allows a child to make his or her voice and desires heard, and empower that child to possibly influence a decision that will affect that child for life.

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 78-0, 3/23/15

AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Travis Allen, Baker, Bigelow, Bloom, Bonilla, Bonta, Brown, Burke, Calderon, Campos, Chang, Chau, Chávez, Chiu, Chu, Cooley, Cooper, Dababneh, Dahle, Daly, Dodd, Eggman, Frazier, Beth Gaines, Gallagher, Cristina Garcia, Eduardo Garcia, Gatto, Gipson, Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon, Grove, Hadley, Harper, Roger Hernández, Holden, Irwin, Jones, Jones-Sawyer, Kim, Lackey, Levine, Linder, Lopez, Low, Maienschein, Mathis, Mayes, McCarty, Medina, Melendez, Mullin, Nazarian, Obernolte, O'Donnell, Olsen, Patterson, Perea, Quirk, Rendon, Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez, Salas, Santiago, Steinorth, Mark Stone, Thurmond, Ting, Wagner, Waldron, Weber, Wilk, Williams, Wood, Atkins

NO VOTE RECORDED: Brough, Gray

Prepared by: Nichole Rapier / JUD. / (916) 651-4113

6/12/15 9:22:45

**** END ****

SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE

Senator Hannah-Beth Jackson, Chair

2015-2016 Regular Session

Bill No: AB 217 (Author:Maienschein)

Version: February 2, 2015

Hearing Date: June 9, 2015

Fiscal: No

Urgency: No

Consultant: NR

SUBJECT

Juvenile law: hearings

DESCRIPTION

This bill would require the court to inform a minor present at a dependency hearing of his or her right to address the court and participate in that hearing.

BACKGROUND

The importance of allowing a dependent child to participate in court hearings has been recognized in California since 2003, when the Legislature enacted AB 408 (Steinberg, Ch. 813, Stats. 2003) which afforded a minor the right to address the court and otherwise participate in a dependency hearing. In 2006, Congress also recognized the importance of input from children in court proceedings in the Child and Family Services Improvement Act which required “procedural safeguards to be put in place to assure that in any permanency hearing with respect to a child, the court consults, in an age-appropriate manner, the child regarding the proposed permanency or transition plan. (42 U.S.C. Sec. 675(5)(C).)

Despite these measures, in 2008, the San Jose Mercury News published an in-depth investigatory series, which closely examined the dire condition of the juvenile dependency system. Among the series’ most disturbing findings was that children “whose interest are supposed to determine dependency case outcomes are often regularly excluded from the court process. Judicial officers issue life-altering rulings without ever seeing the children whose futures are being decided.” (Karen de Sa, Broken families, broken courts, Day 1: How rushed justice fails our kids, San Jose Mercury News (Feb. 10, 2008).)

Shortly after the series was published, the California Blue Ribbon Commission on Children in Foster Care issued draft recommendations, which, among other things, emphasized the importance that all participants in dependency proceedings, including children and parents, have an opportunity to be present and heard in court. AB 3051 (Jones, Ch. 166, Stats. 2008) implemented some of those recommendations, to help ensure that all children who wish to participate in their dependency proceedings are provided with the opportunity to do so. This bill would additionally require the court to inform a child during a dependency proceeding that he or she has a right to address the court and participate in the hearing.

CHANGES TO EXISTING LAW

Existing law requires that a child 10 years of age and older receive notice of his or her dependency hearings, including the initial petition hearing, jurisdictional hearings, and review hearings. (Welf. & Inst. Code Secs. 290.1-295.)

Existing law allows a minor who is the subject of a dependency hearing, and who is entitled to notice of the hearing, to be present at the hearing. (Welf. & Inst. Code Sec. 349.)

Existing law provides that a minor present at a hearing has the right to address the court, to participate in the hearing, and to be represented by counsel of his or her choice. (Welf. & Inst. Code Sec. 349.)

Existing law requires the court to determine if a minor, who is 10 years of age or older and not present at a hearing, was properly notified of his or her right to attend the hearing, and allows a court to continue the hearing if the minor was not properly notified or wished to be present at the hearing, unless the court determines that it is not in the best interest of the child to do so. (Welf. & Inst. Code Sec. 349.)

This bill would additionally require the court to inform a minor at a hearing that he or she has the right to address the court and participate in the hearing.

COMMENT

1. Stated need for the bill

According to the author:

Juvenile Dependency hearings are critical to determining the path of a child’s future. Existing law as defined by Section 349 of the Welfare and Institutions Code already provides children with the right to talk during these hearings. Oftentimes the child’s input would be critical and swing a decision in one way or another, but the child is fearful to speak up because they have understandably not been exposed to legal proceedings, or understand their right to speak up.

This bill simply adds one sentence to Section 349 requiring the court to inform a minor of his or her pre-existing right to address the court if so desired. This fix allows a child to make his or her voice and desires heard, and empower that child to possibly influence a decision that will affect that child for life.

2. This bill seeks to ensure that foster children understand their right to participate in their juvenile dependency proceedings

Our juvenile dependency system revolves around protecting the best interest of the child, but this goal is impossible to effectuate unless children are provided with a meaningful opportunity to attend and participate in hearings where life-altering decisions will be made for them. While prior legislation has ensured that children receive notice about dependency hearings and have a right to speak at those hearings, there is no requirement that any adult inform the child of that right. This bill would take an important step in remedying this deficiency in the current system by requiring courts to inform a child, at a dependency hearing, that he or she may address the court and participate in the hearing. In support of this bill, the Juvenile Judges of California write:

Dependency hearings determining a child’s placement can be a difficult and confusing time for that child. Under present law, a minor is allowed to address the court and participate in the hearing, but children may not be aware they can do so. AB 217 would add the requirement that the court “inform the minor that he or she has the right to address the court and participate in the hearing.”

The courtroom environment can be intimidating to anyone, and this [bill] would help ensure that children understand their right to participate in the important decisions being made about them.

While this bill would not address all of the problems plaguing the juvenile dependency system, it would arguably advance the state’s public policy in protecting children under its care and is consistent with the goals of the California Blue Ribbon Commission on Foster Care (Commission) and the Judicial Council. The Commission, charged with developing recommendations on how to improve child welfare and fairness outcomes, issued recommendations and an action plan in 2009, which sought to “fundamentally change a system that too often fails our state’s children and their families despite the

efforts of hardworking and dedicated professionals.” As part of that report, the Commission recommended that the courts “ensure that all participants in dependency proceedings, including children and parents, have an opportunity to be present and heard in court.”

The Children’s Advocacy Institute, sponsor of this bill, writes that this bill would require the judge to “properly, and consistent with the importance of the proceeding to the child and mindful of how intimidating and awesome the proceeding might feel, actually invite the child in every proceeding to speak.”

Support: Advokids; Children Now; County Welfare Directors Association of California; Crittenton Services for Children and Families; Juvenile Court Judges of California

Opposition: None Known

HISTORY

Source: Children’s Advocacy Institute – University of San Diego School of Law

Related Pending Legislation: None Known

Prior Legislation:

AB 408 (Steinberg, Chapter 813, Statutes of 2003) See Background.

AB 3051 (Jones, Chapter 166, Statutes of 2008) See Background.

Prior Vote:

Assembly Floor (Ayes 78, Noes 0)

Assembly Judiciary Committee (Ayes 10, Noes 0)

**************

Date of Hearing: March 17, 2015

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY

Mark Stone, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 217

Author:(Maienschein) – As Introduced Ver:February 2, 2015

PROPOSED CONSENT

SUBJECT: DEPENDENCY HEARINGS: FOSTER CHILD PARTICIPATION

KEY ISSUE: SHOULD foster children be NOTIFIED OF THEIR RIGHT TO ATTEND, and participate in, their dependency hearings, WHERE CRITICAL, LIFE-CHANGING DECISIONS ARE MADE?

SYNOPSIS

Similar to prior measures, this bill continues California’s effort in enabling dependent children to be a part of the court process that can affect all aspects of their lives. Traditionally, a child who was the subject of a dependency proceeding was only allowed to attend the hearing, not participate. However, the State adopted a new approach. In 2003, the Legislature approved a bill – AB 408 (Steinberg), Chap. 813 – which, among other things, afforded a minor the right to participate and address the court in a dependency hearing. Then in 2008, the Legislature approved another dependency participation bill – AB 3051 (Judiciary), Chap. 166 – which authorized a court to postpone a dependency hearing if it was necessary to allow a child to participate unless a continuance was not in the child’s best interest.

This bill, sponsored by the Children’s Advocacy Institute, reaffirms California’s commitment to ensure that children in foster care are able to have a meaningful opportunity to participate in their dependency court hearings. This bill simply requires the court to inform the dependent child during the proceeding that he or she has a right to address the court and participate in the hearing. This bill is consistent with recommendations from the Pew Commission on Children in Foster Care, and the Judicial Council Blue Ribbon Commission. This bill is supported by Children Now, the County Welfare Directors Association, and Juvenile Court Judges of California. There is no known opposition.

SUMMARY: Provides a child who is the subject of a dependency hearing notice about his or her right to participate in the dependency hearing. Specifically, this bill requires the court to inform a child present at and the subject of a dependency hearing that he or she has a right to address the court and participate in the hearing.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Requires that, among others, children 10 and over receive notice of their dependency hearings, including the initial petition hearing, jurisdictional hearings and review hearings. (Welfare & Institutions Code Sections 290.1-295. All further statutory references are to that code unless otherwise stated.)

2. Allows a minor who is the subject of a dependency hearing and who is entitled notice of the hearing to be present at the hearing. (Section 349.)

3. Allows a minor present at the hearing the right to address the court and to participate in the hearing. Allows that minor to be represented at the hearing by counsel of his or her choice. (Section 349.)

4. If the minor is 10 or older and not present at the hearing, requires the court to determine whether the minor was properly notified of his or her right to attend the hearing. If the minor was not properly notified, or wished to be present at the hearing, the court may continue the hearing to allow the minor to be present, unless the court determines that it is not in the best interest of the child to do so. (Section 349.)

5. At the hearing to terminate parental rights or establish guardianship, requires the court to consider the wishes of the dependent child and to act in the child's best interests. Requires the court, if the child who is 10 and over is not present at the hearing, to determine whether the minor was properly notified of his or her right to attend the hearing and inquire as to the reason why the child is not present. (Section 366.26(h).)

FISCAL EFFECT: As currently in print this bill is keyed non-fiscal.

COMMENTS: According to the author:

For California’s abused and neglected children, the future lies within a confusing tangle of government offices and crucial legal proceedings, called juvenile dependency hearings. During these hearings, the fate of where the child will reside and how their future will unfold is decided. Current law allows a minor to speak during dependency hearings if the minor so desires, but this is not made explicitly clear to the minor, who may very well be confused and overwhelmed by the weight and formality of the court hearing.

AB 217 will simply require the court to inform the minor of his or her right to address the court and participate in the hearing. This fix allows a child to make his or her voice and desires heard, and empower[s] that child to possibly influence a decision that will affect that child for life.

Dependency court decisions dramatically impact children's lives. When children are removed from their homes due to abuse or neglect, they are placed under the jurisdiction of the dependency court. The dependency court gets to decide where they live, whom they live with, and whether they can see their family again. The court even decides whether to terminate parental rights and begin adoption proceedings. However, even though these hearings affect just about every aspect of a child's life, many children do not know about their right to participate. Experts believe that foster children who have some say in the major decisions in their life are more apt to succeed than those who do not.

Studies have shown that there are many advantages to youth participation at dependency hearings: “Attending court benefits both the youth and the court. Youth have the opportunity to understand the process by seeing firsthand the court proceedings. They also develop a sense of control over the process when they actively participate. The court learns more about children than simply what is presented in reports.” (Andrea Khoury, Seen and Heard: Involving Children in Dependency Court, 25 ABA Child Law Practice Vol. 10, p. 150 (Dec. 2006).)

The latter point is reiterated by the Pew Commission on Children in Foster Care, which found that the quality of decisions is improved when judges can hear and see the key parties. The Commission found:

Children, parents, and caregivers all benefit when they have the opportunity to actively participate in court proceedings, as does the quality of decisions when judges can see and hear from key parties. State court leaders should consider the impact of factors such as court room and waiting area accommodations, case scheduling, use of technology in the court room, and translation of written materials. These issues can make the process more accessible and meaningful for all participants, including children.

(Pew Commission on Children in Foster Care, Fostering the Future: Safety, Permanence and Well-Being for Children in Foster Care, p. 42 (May, 2004).)

Recommendations from the Judicial Council California Blue Ribbon Commission on Foster Care provide further support for this bill. The Blue Ribbon Commission on Children in Foster Care (Commission) was appointed by Chief Justice Ronald George in 2006 to develop recommendations on how courts and their partner entities could improve child welfare and fairness outcomes. The Commission's recommendations, issued in May 2009, provide support for this bill. The Commission found:

The courts are often the unseen partners in child welfare, but every child and parent in the foster-care system knows it is the courts where critical decisions are made, including such life-changing questions as where and with whom a child will live. When dependency court judges and attorneys are not acquainted with “100 percent” of the child, when there is inadequate time or not enough information to make informed decisions, hearings are likely to be rushed or delayed. Children and families suffer.

Of particular relevance to this legislation, the Commission determined that all participants in dependency hearings, including children and families, should have an opportunity to be heard and meaningfully participate in court. To that end, the Commission recommended, among other things, the following:

• Judicial officers identify and engage all parties in each case as early as possible;

• Judicial officers and other stakeholders remove barriers that prevent children, parents, and caregivers from attending hearings;

• Hearings be available at times that do not conflict with school or work or other requirements of a family’s case plan;

• All parties, including children, parents, and social workers, have the opportunity to review reports and meet with their attorneys before the initial hearing and in advance of all subsequent hearings;

• All parties leave court hearings with a clear understanding of what happened, why decisions were made, and if appropriation, what actions they need to take;

• The AOC provide judicial officers and court participants with education and support to create courtroom environments that promote communication with, and participation of, all parties, including children, that takes into account age, development, language, and cultural issues.

(California Blue Ribbon Commission on Children in Foster Care, Final Report and Action Plan: Fostering a New Future for California’s Children (May 2009).)

Given that this bill seeks to ensure that children are informed about their right to participate in their dependency hearings, this bill advances the Commission's recommendations to allow children to meaningfully participate in their hearings.

While this bill does not address all issues surrounding court attendance, it furthers the goal of making the court process accessible for foster children. The bill helps ensure that children understand that their voice matters in a court proceeding. This bill, however, does not address all of the issues that may make participation difficult. This includes a legislatively established transportation mandate, although current law does allow a court to issue orders necessary to ensure that the child has an opportunity to be present. Moreover, this bill does not address the high ratio of child-clients to dependency lawyers, or the need for additional funding to tackle the growing caseloads of dependency lawyers, although current law provides that all children be afforded with the right of appointed counsel in a dependency hearing.

ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: The Children’s Advocacy Institute at the University of San Diego School of Law states: that while “children are permitted to speak if they [are asked to], too few do [so] because of how intimidating the setting is.” The Children’s Advocacy Institute contends that AB 217 will encourage judges to be “mindful of how intimidating and awesome the proceeding might feel” to the child by “[inviting] the child in every proceeding to speak.”

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

Children’s Advocacy Institute – University of San Diego School of Law (sponsor)

Children Now

County Welfare Directors Association of California

Juvenile Court Judges of California

Opposition

None on file

Analysis Prepared by: Leora Gershenzon and Eric Dang / JUD. / (916) 319-2334